I've looked at the compiled version now. It's nicely written, but my concern is that this is no longer written in 'reference' style. To me, parts of it seem more suited to the LM. The idea of the NR is that people already well-familiar with LilyPond can quickly find a keyword or syntax they have forgotten, without having to wade through introductory material. That process was easier with the old layout. I'll not object to this change, but we ought to do it only after explicit agreement from others that this style of writing is acceptable in the NR.
http://codereview.appspot.com/3667041/diff/13001/Documentation/notation/input.itely File Documentation/notation/input.itely (right): http://codereview.appspot.com/3667041/diff/13001/Documentation/notation/input.itely#newcode525 Documentation/notation/input.itely:525: @node Creating titles headers and footers This breaks a ref in learning/common-notation.itely http://codereview.appspot.com/3667041/diff/13001/Documentation/notation/input.itely#newcode789 Documentation/notation/input.itely:789: @code{copyright} if there is only one page). ... @code{copyright} notice if there ... http://codereview.appspot.com/3667041/ _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
