LGTM.
http://codereview.appspot.com/4079064/diff/1/Documentation/notation/pitches.itely File Documentation/notation/pitches.itely (right): http://codereview.appspot.com/4079064/diff/1/Documentation/notation/pitches.itely#newcode827 Documentation/notation/pitches.itely:827: it may be converted to its @notation{retrograde} (written backwards). I'm not certain you need to spell out "written backwards". You haven't said what "inverted" or "transposed" means, after all! If you're paranoid, then how about adding a stub to the music glossary, and a @rgloss{} to the @seealso ? (or actually add a full entry to the glossary if you want) http://codereview.appspot.com/4079064/diff/1/Documentation/notation/pitches.itely#newcode855 Documentation/notation/pitches.itely:855: \new Staff { I know that you don't want to hear this at this point, but... You know, all these examples are beautifully written and are very clear. I think we could have capitalized on this by doing everything at once. @lilypond motif = ... diatonicScale = ... pentatonicscale = ... chromaticscale = ... \relative c' { \motif \modalTranspose \motif \modalInvert \motif \modalRetrograde \motif @end lilypond this isn't really a serious suggestion, and in any case, I'd need to look at the output of a .ly example before being able to have a serious opinion on whether this would actually help or not. (the all-in-one example might be too long or confusing or something) I'm mainly just mentioning this so that people have it in the backs of their minds when writing future doc stuff. (BTW, do you actually need the \score and \new Staff in these? My first guess would be that a simple \relative c' would suffice, but maybe I'm wrong or maybe the transposing complicates the \relative) http://codereview.appspot.com/4079064/ _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
