Re: Doc: new syntax for \tweak, \override (2936) (issue 6852052)

[tdanielsmusic]

https://codereview.appspot.com/6852052/diff/14001/Documentation/notation/changing-defaults.itely
File Documentation/notation/changing-defaults.itely (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/6852052/diff/14001/Documentation/notation/changing-defaults.itely#newcode1918
Documentation/notation/changing-defaults.itely:1918: (The syntax used
prior to Release 2.17.6 was
On 2012/11/23 22:05:47, Graham Percival wrote:
> I don't think we should be talking about deprecated syntax; otherwise
we could
> end up with tons of side comments.  The documentation is large enough
as it is.
> We should keep "used prior" material in Changes.

I agree in general, but the point is both forms of the
syntax are still valid and so should be documented.
Furthermore it's only /likely/ to become deprecated;
it hasn't yet been deprecated.  When it does this
paragraph can go.  It also contrasts with \tweak -
its syntax /has/ changed.

I've minimised the effect on the documentation by using
the new form alone everywhere (or at least David did)
and restricting the description of the old form to
just this one paragraph and one example.  I don't see
any other situations where this has arisen, so it's
unlikely to get out of control.  I think we should
leave this as it is.

https://codereview.appspot.com/6852052/