Hello, Sorry to seem to be obsessing about 'footnotes', it's just that when one does start to look at all the nuances of a new function to make clear documentation, one's focus does become a bit tunnel-vision-like.
Looking at NR 1.7.2 (Balloon Text) and my proposed patch http://codereview.appspot.com/4751045/ for Footnotes; I'm wondering now what the *real* difference between the two are, other than \footnote[Grob] lets you add a footnote to a balloon text - albeit without the 'balloon'. Is this just the same core function with a 'bit of extra' either way - where the intersect is that I get annotated grobs/text - and the non-intersect parts of this Euler diagram is that one has a balloon around it or one has a footnote attached to it? Now if I can just add \box markup to a \footnote[Grob] then why is this significantly different to balloon text, and if not different shouldn't we be deprecating balloon text or modifying \footnote[Grob] and incoporating them into balloon text from a code point of view? This is probably a GLISS candidate but I'm starting to feel that either NR 1.7.2 needs moving to NR 3.x.x (where footnotes are going to be - I forget exactly now writing this) or vice versa. James _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
