Re: GDP: fourth rearrangement

[Graham Percival]

Mats Bengtsson wrote:
> - 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"?

No; we should use "staff" and "staves".  One of the instructions for the 
Trivial/Easy will be to fix any such mistakes.

I think I wrote "when dealing with multiple @internalsref{Staff}s, you 
can...", but such phrases should be rephrased to "multiple @{Staff} 
contexts".

> - 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.

I've expanded the Education section to include all of these things.  I'm 
not wild about the name "Education", but I think all these items work 
well inside that section (whatever we name the section).

> - 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.

To match other subsection titles, I called it "Writing text".

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

As Valentin said; the markup commands are even more of a reference. 
Hmm... actually, what about moving these into an Appendix?

Cheers,
- Graham