On 05/02/15 19:05, Brian Barker wrote: > You *have* missed the point here, I think. It is indeed not obvious > what may affect what, so someone will have to experiment, removing > details piecemeal until just before the problem disappears. The idea > of minimal examples is that if you are not prepared to do some of the > work in that investigation, why would anyone else want to do it for > you? That seems a reasonable concept to me. OK, i think i see what is meant now thank you > > Incidentally, your syllable division is a bit irregular, I think. You > have "sur-re-xit", which is right, I think, but also "su-rrex-it", > which almost certainly isn't. Surely "be-ne-di-ca-mus", not > "be-ne-dic-a-mus"? "Mu-lie-er-es" should surely be "mu-li-er-es"? > "Pa-ssus" -> "pas-sus"? "Miserrimo": is that a word? Are there more? Thanks, i'll tighten that up
C.
_______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
