Re: Fw: Vocal music

[Valentin Villenave]

2008/10/1 Trevor Daniels <address@hidden>:

> Thanks for this.  I'm happy with the reorganisation in general.  As there is
> only one vocal "instrument" the standard layout for NR 2 does not apply
> here, so dropping the Common notation ... section is fine.

On second thought, I think maybe it might be needed... See below.

> There will not be many References for vocal music, as pretty well all of it
> is going to be in this section, but there should be one to
> @rlearning{Songs}, which gives a gentle introduction to some of the easier
> concepts.  Maybe this should be near the top, rather than buried in section
> 2.1.1.4.  Could the References be moved up?  And it certainly must not be
> removed!  Apart from the reference mentioned it should contain at least refs
> to the templates.

Hm, tricky. My problem is that this section does not really belong in
a section about Lyrics. Ideally, there would be a "common notation"
before that, and the "references" section would totally belong here.
But: what do you put in a "common notation for vocal music" section?
Besides -maybe- parlato noteheads?

> On formatting, please use @unnumberedsubsubsec rather than @subsubsection.
> This avoids the ugly four-element numbers and gives a better layout in html.

Oh, I have used numbered subsubsecs everywhere in NR 1.8! I'll change
them immediately.

> I've not pushed this, as I know nothing of translations, but I'm happy to do
> so if John says it's OK.

I have taken the liberty to push the new layout, since it didn't break
compiling as far as I could see.
He has pushed an update for .po strings in the meantime, but I'm
afraid the po strings now have to be updated again :-(

Cheers,
Valentin