LGTM
http://codereview.appspot.com/6098050/diff/2001/Documentation/changes.tely File Documentation/changes.tely (right): http://codereview.appspot.com/6098050/diff/2001/Documentation/changes.tely#newcode170 Documentation/changes.tely:170: Another consequence is that string numbers and right hand fingerings on IMO each @item should be self-contained, and multi-paragraph items are the way to go if there's multiple implications of a single change. Could this (and the previous @item) just be additional paragraphs (i.e. remove the @item). http://codereview.appspot.com/6098050/diff/2001/Documentation/notation/fretted-strings.itely File Documentation/notation/fretted-strings.itely (left): http://codereview.appspot.com/6098050/diff/2001/Documentation/notation/fretted-strings.itely#oldcode103 Documentation/notation/fretted-strings.itely:103: @warning{String numbers @strong{must} be defined inside a chord awesome change. http://codereview.appspot.com/6098050/diff/2001/Documentation/notation/fretted-strings.itely File Documentation/notation/fretted-strings.itely (right): http://codereview.appspot.com/6098050/diff/2001/Documentation/notation/fretted-strings.itely#newcode521 Documentation/notation/fretted-strings.itely:521: \new Voice \with { \override StringNumber #'stencil = ##f } { our vague almost-certainly-unwritten guidelines on lilypond formatting would suggest that the \override should be on a newline, but I can't be bothered to complain about this. http://codereview.appspot.com/6098050/ _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
