[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: GDP: Time to plan the revision of NR 2 "Specialist Notation"
From: |
Valentin Villenave |
Subject: |
Re: GDP: Time to plan the revision of NR 2 "Specialist Notation" |
Date: |
Thu, 3 Apr 2008 23:40:34 +0200 |
2008/4/3, Graham Percival <address@hidden>:
> And bowing, for string players?
>
> "Bowing may be added to scores like other articulations; for more
> information, see @ref{articulations and ornamentations}. The
> exact names of bowings are described in @ref{List of articulations}."
> ?
>
> Once a reader figures out the above, he'll be wondering why we
> didn't they just write
> c2\upbow
> c2\downbow
?
Seems consistent to me... Do you mean you don't like this sentence?
Was it meant to be a joke? If so, I don't find it more ridiculous than
the other documentation-style sentences you make me write :)
Cheers,
Valentin
Re: GDP: Time to plan the revision of NR 2 "Specialist Notation", Trevor Daniels, 2008/04/03
Re: GDP: Time to plan the revision of NR 2 "Specialist Notation", René Brandenburger, 2008/04/03
Re: GDP: Time to plan the revision of NR 2 "Specialist Notation", Ian Hulin, 2008/04/04