On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 14:10:47 +0200 "Valentin Villenave" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2008/4/18 Mats Bengtsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > Please note that the current "Global" list is not the full list, Sorry. I definitely wasn't paying attention. > > If all the different categories (subsections!?) end up on the same > > HTML page, > > then I don't see the point of duplicating the information and also > > supplying a > > list with all commands in sorted order. Ok. That's easily done. Valentin: @appendixsec Markup commands @subsubheading Formatting @include formatting-list.texi @subsubheading Alignment @include alignment-list.texi ... > "Common markup commands" is indeed meant to be referenced in "common > formatting commands": Well, I've already said that those names/categories are not ideal. "formatting commands" might be better. Of course, it might make sense to rename the 1.8.2 section in that case. > 2- It is not well coded, I agree with that. It's just a first idea, > that we need to improve. Adding an optional argument to > define-builtin-markup-command is a good idea, but it's just a first > step; then what? What else is needed? We want to group these commands into categories. Your first result was good; the programming was just not ideal. If your patch didn't have that problem, I'd have pushed it to master already. > 3- Strangely, I'm more pessimistic than Graham here: I don't think > there's much we can do to prevent the docs from easily getting > outdated in such cases. I'd love to, but... I'm running out of ideas. Nothing else is needed. When a programmer adds a new \markup command, he edits define-markup-commands.scm. Programmer doesn't touch .itely, since they don't like doing that anyway; once this system is set up, documenters don't touch .scm, since they don't like doing *that* anyway. Cheers, - Graham _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
