There are a few questionable things in the docs, but I gather that the main point of this patch is the code change, so maybe it's ok to push this patch anyway and fix the docs later.
http://codereview.appspot.com/6195098/diff/14002/Documentation/notation/input.itely File Documentation/notation/input.itely (right): http://codereview.appspot.com/6195098/diff/14002/Documentation/notation/input.itely#newcode1048 Documentation/notation/input.itely:1048: Could we get a @lilypond here? All those @var{}s are going to turn away some readers. To quote somebody or other: "show, not tell. If necessary, show and tell". http://codereview.appspot.com/6195098/diff/14002/Documentation/notation/input.itely#newcode1057 Documentation/notation/input.itely:1057: @item offset I'd prefer a newline before each @item other than the first one, but that's kind-of nitpicking so I don't mind if you don't bother. http://codereview.appspot.com/6195098/diff/14002/Documentation/notation/input.itely#newcode1101 Documentation/notation/input.itely:1101: e\noBeam c4 d4 do we really need a \noBeam in here to confuse things? IMO the example would stand on its own without a noBeam, possibly after altering the music to suit. http://codereview.appspot.com/6195098/diff/14002/Documentation/notation/input.itely#newcode1225 Documentation/notation/input.itely:1225: -\footnote if this still refers to the a'4 then could it also be indented two space? If you want to show more indentation, then maybe add another two spaces for the \markup that belongs to the \footnote? http://codereview.appspot.com/6195098/ _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
