LGTM
https://codereview.appspot.com/318560043/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
https://codereview.appspot.com/314530043/diff/1/Documentation/css/lilypond-website.css
File Documentation/css/lilypond-website.css (right):
https://codereview.appspot.com/314530043/diff/1/Documentation/css/lilypond-website.css#newcode709
Documentation/css/lilypond-website.css:709: font-size: 1.1
Sorry, I disagree. I think the boxes make it easier to skim the page;
there horizontal gap makes it absolutely clear that each proposal is
distinct.
I have no opinion about using bold vs. italics for the "difficulty",
"requirements", etc. parts, though.
https://codereview.appspot.com/314530043/
On 2017/02/22 19:01:52, Graham Percival wrote:
what else does this change on the webpage? I mean, don't we use
@subheading
anywhere else?
On that note, I wrote a tool for my job that does regression testing for
a website (very similar to our lilypond regression tests). I'll try to
polish it
Am 22.02.2017 um 20:04 schrieb gra...@percival-music.ca:
> Sorry, I disagree. I think the boxes make it easier to skim the page;
> there horizontal gap makes it absolutely clear that each proposal is
> distinct.
I think the point in Paul's suggestion is to make a clear separation
between the pr
On 02/22/2017 02:32 PM, Urs Liska wrote:
Am 22.02.2017 um 20:04 schrieb gra...@percival-music.ca:
Sorry, I disagree. I think the boxes make it easier to skim the page;
there horizontal gap makes it absolutely clear that each proposal is
distinct.
Myself, I don't find the skimmability or dist
On 02/22/2017 02:07 PM, gra...@percival-music.ca wrote:
On that note, I wrote a tool for my job that does regression testing for
a website (very similar to our lilypond regression tests). I'll try to
polish it and get my boss to OK open-sourcing it in the next few days.
This will help future C
