Re: GDP: fourth rearrangement

[Mats Bengtsson]

Looks great! A few minor details:

- In Rhythms, I would like to rearrange the order a bit, to put the most
 common aspects at the top. For example:

1.2 Rhythms
              1.2.1 Writing rhythms
                  + Durations
                  + Augmentation dots
                  + Tuplets
                  + Scaling durations
              1.2.2 Writing rests
                  + Rests
                  + Skips 
                  + Multi measure rests
              1.2.3 Bars
                  + Bar check
                  + Bar lines
                  + Bar numbers
                  + Barnumber check
                  + Rehearsal marks 
              1.2.4 Displaying rhythms
                  + Time signature
                  + Partial measures
                  + Unmetered music
                  + Polymetric notation
                  + Automatic note splitting
                  + Automatic beams
                  + Manual beams
                  + Feathered beams 
              1.2.5 Special rhythmic concerns
                  + Aligning to cadenzas 
                  + Time administration
                  + Proportional notation (introduction)



- You have a much better feeling for the English language than I do, but
 do you think that we should keep the current mixture of "staff" and 
"stave"
 to denote the same thing, for example in the subsection titles within 
"Staff notation"?

- I'm sure some people don't agree that "Fingering instructions" belong to
 "Educational use", but it's OK with me. Same goes for "Ambitus"

- "Coloring objects" and "Parentheses" do not only apply to Note heads and
 stems, in general.

- How about adding some section like "Other typesetting features", which 
could
 contain things that don't really fit in anywhere else, like the four I 
mentioned above.

- Again, I might not have the right intuition for English language, but 
how about
 replacing "Text in a score" with something along the lines of "Textual 
annotations"
 I would also move "New dynamic marks" from 1.17.2 to 1.17.1.

- Why doesn't Text markup commands belong under 1.17.2 Text markup?

   /Mats

Graham Percival wrote:
> Based on the feedback, it seems that most users would vastly prefer 
> something like this?
> http://lilypondwiki.tuxfamily.org/index.php?title=Doc
>
> Numbered titles are new HTML pages; un-numbered titles are on the same 
> HTML page.
>
> Sections 1.9 through 1.16 weren't put into the same arrangement, but 
> you can imagine how it would continue.
>
> - Graham
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> lilypond-devel mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel