Re: doc error: table of contents

[Mats Bengtsson]

Edward Sanford Sutton, III wrote:
>   The first item below 'Table of Contents' is blank, followed by the second 
> being 'GNU LilyPond -- The music typesetter'
>   Sorry, but my best guess is that lilypond.tely called either macros.texi or 
> preface.itely to add that spot, but I do not understand the file syntax 
> enough to figure out why that addition is present, and what changes would 
> correct it.

>   Do you have suggested docs for reading to learn these file formats; I'd like 
> to learn the file structures that are used before I try to fix them.

The texinfo format is documented in info, so try the command
'info texinfo'. However, for most of the editing you really don't
need to know any of the details of texinfo, it's just to do similarly
to what's already there.


>   Should I be duplicating the CVS tree a second time, so that I have one to 
> edit, or even a third time so that I have one to compile, one to edit, and 
> one to diff the edits against? I'm assuming that with copying the whole tree, 
> diff outputs the directory structure as preferred. Does diff have an operand 
> to add the desired file path reference?

If you have checked out the files from CVS, you can edit the files and
simply run the command 'cvs diff -u <filename>' to obtain the patch.

>  Should diff files be attached, or just pasted into an email. Should I still 
> mention what is being changed and/or why, or will the diff file make that 
> obvious enough? Sometimes I may make a mistake myself, or may have 
> misinterpreted what was written to begin with, and sometimes I question what 
> is really meant; not all of my suggestoin may really be desired in the end.

I would attach them. Please document any major changes in the ChangeLog
file. If you use Emacs to edit the files, M-x add-change-log-entry will
automatically generate a nice template for the change log entry. Then,
include the ChangeLog in the diff as well.

>   Are there standards for margins and spacing in these files that should be 
> followed; I've seen changes in margins, spacing between words in sentences, 
> and one vs two spaces after a period both being present.

I'd just follow the same style as is already being used. Texinfo will
handle whitespace, so duplicated spaces don't make any change in the
output.

  /Mats