Re: GDP: \articulation and -\articulation

[Graham Percival]

On Mon, 25 Feb 2008 22:08:09 -0800
"Patrick McCarty" <address@hidden> wrote:

> On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 9:50 PM, Graham Percival <address@hidden>
> wrote:
> 
> >  Interesting!  However, as this example indicates, it's not
> >  specific to articulations.  We'll add info to LM 3 and
> >  NR 3 about this.
> >
> >  Since there's nothing specific about articulations here, we'll
> >  remove it from NR 1.3.
> 
> Just to be clear about this:
> 
> -- In NR 1.3, we will only be explaining the \ syntax for
> articulations and ornamentations.
> -- The - syntax will only be explained for the `shorthands'
> 
> Is this correct?

To be clear about this... "probably".  "Almost certainly"?

At the moment, I'm envisioning a sentence-link to the "When to add -"
subsection in NR 3, just like we have a sentence-link to
"Controlling direction and placement".  But I only learned about
the - issue an hour or two ago.  I don't want to say "definitely"
until I find out a bit more about this.

For now, only explain the \ syntax for articulations (and add that
example).  Dump a FIXME: comment for the shorthands and move on
to other material in your section.  I estimate that I won't have
any kind of final decision until the weekend.

Cheers,
- Graham