On Thu, 1 May 2008 13:33:03 -0700 "Patrick McCarty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 12:42 AM, Graham Percival <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > We could even go with pairs of: > > \crescText > > \crescHairpin > > I still think we should scrap the Hairpin commands. Don't forget that the lilypond object is called Hairpin. It's not a bad thing to emphasize the names of the internals objects, even if you don't like those actual names. (this arose earlier with US vs. British spellings) > But maybe we > should wait to see if bug #143 is fixed before we make a final > decision on this issue. Given that it's been at least two years since it was reported, I wouldn't hold my breath. :) That said, we have a fair number of new people fixing some bugs, so one of them might be able to tackle this one. > In the meantime, the current behavior of \setTextCresc and the others > -- that they are only applied once -- should be documented. Would > this be more appropriate in the main body of NR 1.3.1.2 or in > @knownissues? @knownissues. Cheers, - Graham _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
