El 06/02/2014 19:11, "James" <pkx1...@gmail.com> escribió: > > On 06/02/14 17:40, Francisco Vila wrote: >> >> 2014-02-06 18:26 GMT+01:00 James <pkx1...@gmail.com>: >>> >>> On 06/02/14 14:30, Francisco Vila wrote: >>>> >>>> Hello. >>>> >>>> Here >>>> >>>> >>>> http://www.lilypond.org/doc/v2.19/Documentation/notation/fonts.html#single-entry-fonts >>>> >>>> shouldn't we say >>>> >>>> "The following console command" >>>> >>>> or similar, instead of >>>> >>>> "The following command" >>>> >>>> which erroneusly suggests a lilypond command? >>> >>> It is a lilypond command. >>> >>> lilypond -dshow... >>> >>> What else could it be? >> >> Well, a lilypond command is a command of the GNU lilypond free music >> typesetting language. 'lilypond' is not a lilypond command. It is a >> shell command. You launch the lilypond executable with it. >> >> Reading the LilyPond documentation, it soon becomes clear what a >> command is in this context, and we should not freely mix lilypond >> commands and console / commandline commands in the same section >> without some kind of warning. >> >> I _can_ tell about at least a case in which an user tried to run >> lilypond -dshow... from inside a lilypond document in frescobaldi. >> > Then something like > > "Running lilypond with the following option displays a list of all available fonts on the operating system:" > > I just don't think we need to get too buried in the different contexts of the word 'command'. >
The very minimum needed can never be too much. Did you read my last paragraph?
_______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
