I've added a comment about the docstring -- it's a request for consideration, not a demand for change.
Also, I think a changes.tely entry should be included. https://codereview.appspot.com/575330043/diff/551180043/scm/define-grob-properties.scm File scm/define-grob-properties.scm (right): https://codereview.appspot.com/575330043/diff/551180043/scm/define-grob-properties.scm#newcode573 scm/define-grob-properties.scm:573: (label-alignments ,number-pair? "The vertical alignments of OttavaBracket In general, we like to have properties that are not defined for specific grobs so that they can be reused. This helps keep the namespace manageable. Are there other grobs that have labels? For example, Volta brackets? Nobody I know would want to put a Volta bracket below the staff, but with people regularly inventing new notation I can never say never ... Or maybe line spanners? I'm raising this concern not because I want to have this property applied to any other interface as part of this patch, but because I wonder if the property description should say "The vertical alignment of a grob label when the grob is placed below and above the staff", thus removing the OttaveBracket part from the definition. In our code, we know it applies to an OttavaBracket because we override OttavaBracket.label-alignments. This is not a requirement for change, just a request for consideration. https://codereview.appspot.com/575330043/
