Thanks for doing this. Some comments (it's the one thing I feel competent enough to join in and make suggestions on).
James https://codereview.appspot.com/6742061/diff/2001/Documentation/notation/rhythms.itely File Documentation/notation/rhythms.itely (right): https://codereview.appspot.com/6742061/diff/2001/Documentation/notation/rhythms.itely#newcode2765 Documentation/notation/rhythms.itely:2765: New bar line styles can be defined with @code{\defineBarLine}. Could we have some @funindex \defineBarLine @cindex bar lines, defining @cindex defining bar lines or some similar case - I haven't checked this in the current documents to see what else we are using. https://codereview.appspot.com/6742061/diff/2001/Documentation/notation/rhythms.itely#newcode2779 Documentation/notation/rhythms.itely:2779: The second argument is a list containing three entries I think you need to clarify this more. I cannot see what the 'second argument' is. So for example if you look here: http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.16/Documentation/notation/the-set-command you can see that we list the command with appropriate @var{..}. That would help the non-technical user to at least get a handle on the command in full. Then move this para above the @lilypond (after the \defineBarLine @var{} @var{} and this is more coherent to read. https://codereview.appspot.com/6742061/diff/2001/Documentation/notation/rhythms.itely#newcode2781 Documentation/notation/rhythms.itely:2781: beginning of the next line and as a span bar, respectively. Is there any merit in @ref{}ing http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.16/Documentation/notation/visibility-of-objects#using-break_002dvisibility Or perhaps giving an equivalence? https://codereview.appspot.com/6742061/diff/2001/Documentation/notation/rhythms.itely#newcode2783 Documentation/notation/rhythms.itely:2783: There are currently eleven glyphs available: See my comment below about the term 'glyphs'. https://codereview.appspot.com/6742061/diff/2001/Documentation/notation/rhythms.itely#newcode2789 Documentation/notation/rhythms.itely:2789: segno sign, and @code{"["} and @code{"]"} for the brackets. Would it be too much to have an @lilypond example for all of them? Instead of just listing them https://codereview.appspot.com/6742061/diff/2001/Documentation/notation/rhythms.itely#newcode2796 Documentation/notation/rhythms.itely:2796: The @code{"-"} sign allows to distinguish bar lines with The @code{"-"} sign distinguishes bar lines that have identical... https://codereview.appspot.com/6742061/diff/2001/Documentation/notation/rhythms.itely#newcode2802 Documentation/notation/rhythms.itely:2802: way to define new bar line glyphs. For more informations are these actually 'glyphs'? I ask because if they are then they need to appear somewhere like here: http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.16/Documentation/notation/the-feta-font I've never really understood why bar lines (apart from the very fancy scripts.varsegno) are not listed here. I am guessing they are not glyphs and this therefore needs to be corrected? https://codereview.appspot.com/6742061/ _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
