Re: Doc: Clarify documentation of footnotes (2971) (issue 6845078)

[dak]

http://codereview.appspot.com/6845078/diff/8001/Documentation/notation/input.itely
File Documentation/notation/input.itely (right):

http://codereview.appspot.com/6845078/diff/8001/Documentation/notation/input.itely#newcode1240
Documentation/notation/input.itely:1240: Although notes inside a chord
do cause events, time-based footnotes
That is confusing: stems and flags are not events.  I'd rather write
something like:
"Exactly which of a chord's multiple note events will be deemed the root
cause of a stem or flag is undefined.  So for annotating those,
time-based footnotes are preferable as well."

http://codereview.appspot.com/6845078/diff/8001/Documentation/notation/input.itely#newcode1388
Documentation/notation/input.itely:1388: < \single \footnote #'(-1 . -3)
"An A" NoteHead
This is unnecessarily contorted: a NoteHead is the (only) directly
caused grob from a chord note, so just writing
\footnote #'(-1 . -3) "An A" a
will work fine.  \single is only necessary when you _need_ to specify a
particular grobname for a footnote attached to an event because the grob
in question is not directly attached to the event as well as the only
such grob.

http://codereview.appspot.com/6845078/