On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 1:06 AM, Trevor Daniels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Patrick McCarty wrote Wednesday, August 13, 2008 4:21 AM >> >> I have a couple of questions regarding my section (NR 1.6): >> >> *NR 1.6.2.1 Staff symbol >> >> This section is describing every single way to modify the properties >> of StaffSymbol. The only content that doesn't involve \override >> commands is the explanation of \stopStaff and \startStaff. Should I >> continue using this structure even though it violates GDP policy? If >> not, what content should remain in the main text? > > I think this is fine as it is. > >> *NR 1.6.2.2 Ossia staves >> >> I have collected four different methods of creating ossia staves from >> the mailing lists, etc. They are all attached and produce identical >> output. Should I include all of these methods in the main text, or >> should I describe a general strategy and put these (or more exciting >> versions of them) in @snippets? > > I'm not sure these are four -different- methods. Rather they show > a number of techniques all of which may be required to achieve > a particular effect. I suggest they be grouped to cover two common > situations: > > (a) Where the score has a single or very few isolated > ossia sections. This is essentially the example that is used in > the Learning Manual, beginning in LM 3.1.3 Nesting music > expressions. Might be useful to refer to this, as each technique > is explained there. > > (b) Where the score has many ossia sections. Here using > a permanent ossia staff may be more useful. This would need, > in addition to the techniques in (a), \startStaff, \stopStaff, skip notes, > \RemoveEmptyStaffContext and 'remove-first.
Thanks for the suggestions (Graham's too). I will keep these in mind. And I will definitely include a link the LM 3.1.3. -Patrick _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
