Re: GDP: Reorganisation of NR 2 - Final call for comments

[Trevor Daniels]

Graham Percival wrote:
> "Trevor Daniels" <address@hidden> wrote:
> > I've added these headings.  In some cases it seemed more
> > appropriate to add the Refs heading at the subsection level,
> > others at the subsubsection level.  See Draft 6.
>
> I would rather have them all at the subsubsection level; it's
> suprisingly easy to miss one or two subsections is everything else
> is at the subsubsection level.
> IMO, these References are "common notation" anyway, so they would
> make sense in those subsections.

That makes Draft 6 pretty useless then, but you're right.  Having
one References subsubsection per section gives a better 
correspondance with the snippet list, which is at the section level.

In Draft 7 (attached) I've placed a Common notation subsection
at the top of every section and a References subsubsection 
immediately following.  Seems to work quite well, but we've
now lost all mention of bowed instruments as there is nothing 
left to say about them.

> - Graham
Trevor D

GDP NR 2 Draft 7.txt
Description: Text document