Am 23.03.2009 um 18:03 schrieb Trevor Daniels:
James E. Bailey wrote Monday, March 23, 2009 4:45 PM
Am 23.03.2009 um 16:48 schrieb Trevor Daniels:
James E. Bailey wrote Monday, March 23, 2009 2:15 PM
In any event, hopefully this is an acceptable patch. Whether
or not
introduction of single-staff polyphony should be kept at this
point
in the LM (since doing so does not follow Documentation
policy)
is a
different conversation.
The good news is the patch works fine and the docs still
compile with it applied. So I've applied it and
pushed it to origin/master. I can't say I'm wild about it,
as it uses so many concepts which have not been introduced
at that point, so it will probably be moved when I get back
to working on the LM, but in an odd-numbered release I'm
prepared to accept it.
But, as I said before, I think that removing it altogether is
also a
bad idea. Perhaps a simple warning that the section introduces
several new concepts that haven't been fully explained with
links to
the appropriate sections that do explain them fully would be
enough.
Would you like to prepare another patch which does this?
That would be an improvement.
I don't really understand how to do links in I guess this is
TexInfo (?) format.
Yes:( Hardly the world's best mark-up language. There's
an introduction to it in CG 3 which is sufficient for LP
docs. (Actually I can't see the @ref{} command and friends
there. Are they in the CG, Graham?)
You know, I'd read the relevant sections before, but it didn't
explain the @-commands too well, so I was left feeling like I
hadn't
learned anything I didn't already know. I also took a short look
at
the Texinfo link there, but that seemed like it would be far too
much
reading for what would amount to such a small change.
I can write the paragraph explaining that it introduces
concepts
not yet discussed, and that it may be confusing. But the @
things
just look funny to me.
They're not too bad really. There are plenty of examples
in the docs! Why not have a go at formatting your
paragraph? All you need is an @ref{} to do a link to a section
in the same manual. Just copy one of the examples. I'll check
your patch through and make sure it compiles before pushing
it to origin/master.
Well, my attempt is attached. I don't really know if it works, but
you can tell me that.