Am 16.12.2013 11:11, schrieb David Kastrup:
As said in another reply I have the impression that "Applications" is
>what the majority of commenters would suggest. Although I've got two
>"votes" for "Other uses", which might also be quite telling when seen
>as a menu item.
It's more like "Internal
Urs Liska writes:
> Am 16.12.2013 04:15, schrieb Graham Percival:
>> On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 01:57:23PM +0100, Urs Liska wrote:
>>> Am 12.12.2013 04:19, schrieb Graham Percival:
ok. I also like the "applicances" tab, although I agree with you
that the name might be ideal (but I also ca
Am 16.12.2013 04:15, schrieb Graham Percival:
On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 01:57:23PM +0100, Urs Liska wrote:
Am 12.12.2013 04:19, schrieb Graham Percival:
ok. I also like the "applicances" tab, although I agree with you
that the name might be ideal (but I also can't think of a better
name right no
Am 16.12.2013 04:35, schrieb David Kastrup:
I'd
lean towards applications. Basically, it seems to be "LilyPond as a
building block" but that's too long for a tab name.
That's the problem: All suggestions that "hit the spot" need phrases and
not single words.
But IISC "Applications" it the t
Graham Percival writes:
> On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 01:57:23PM +0100, Urs Liska wrote:
>> Am 12.12.2013 04:19, schrieb Graham Percival:
>> >ok. I also like the "applicances" tab, although I agree with you
>> >that the name might be ideal (but I also can't think of a better
>> >name right now).
>>
On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 01:57:23PM +0100, Urs Liska wrote:
> Am 12.12.2013 04:19, schrieb Graham Percival:
> >ok. I also like the "applicances" tab, although I agree with you
> >that the name might be ideal (but I also can't think of a better
> >name right now).
>
> Just a bunch of ideas:
> We're
