On Wednesday 05 October 2005 10.23, Mats Bengtsson wrote: > Still, I agree with you that especially the spacing between the last > note of each measure the following bar line is too tight. As far as I > can see, there is no way to specify a minimum distance for that setting, > in contrast to all other spacings, for example between the time > signature and the first note.
If the spacing gets too tight and you want it to occupy more rows, you can also play with the \override Score.SeparationItem #'padding setting, see 10.1.8 in the 2.7 manual. > I recommend Section "8.6.2 Setting automatic beam behavior" in the > manual for version 2.7 (the contents is relevant also for version 2.6, > you didn't say what you use) for more insights. > > > Actually one other thing - why is the duration number necessary when > > using a dot? > > I would expect to be able to type "c,. d16 e8 f g. a16" for the 5th bar > > here, but it doesn't work. > > The documentation doesn't suggest that the duration number is required, > > but all the examples include it. > > I don't know any specific reason, but I don't think it hurts, the input > syntax can be confusing enough anyway. Consider for example what > c4 c. c. > would mean if the duration numbers weren't necessary (it would be the > same as > c4 c4. c4.. > which probably would surprise many). Also, the notation wouldn't gain much: It seldom happens regularly that a quarter is followed by a dotted quarter (except in the siciliano rythm), so IMHO there's little point in inventing a special syntax for it. It would IMHO be more motivated with a special abbreviation for notating the {a8. a16 a8. a16} rhythm, which happens more frequently. (but this should be done with a music function or an editor macro imho) -- Erik _______________________________________________ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond