Am 08.04.2014 11:13, schrieb Phil Holmes:
"Urs Liska" <lilyli...@googlemail.com> wrote in message
news:5343080e.4060...@googlemail.com...
Hi,
I've just updated an example on the German Wikipedia
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Notensatzprogramm#Text
and noticed that the position of the initial \voiceOne rest is
suboptimal.
Compare LilyPond's output with that of Score and Amadeus which are
both better.
I have no clue about the Score input but that of Amadeus is
definitely default placement.
Of course it is trivial to write a pitched rest here, but I think the
default placement should be improved. This is also in the context of
Daniel Spreadbury's recent post about their rest positioning algorithm.
If I write a \voiceOne rest it will be placed that far to the top,
even if there are only spacer rests in the other voice.
I don't know how that positioning is realized, but I think the rest
should be placed much lower by default, just with the option to move
upwards to avoid collisions.
I think that's the current behaviour anyway, so the solution might be
one of the following:
- place \voiceXXX rest exactly as \oneVoice, just define the
direction where they move for collision handling.
(this would also eliminate the problem of having to switch to
\oneVoice for a single common rest).
- try to determine the pitches before and after the rest and place it
in the middle (if collision handling allows).
Urs
I'd tend to agree. If you look at the attached, you'll see that the
placement algorithm is rest-length sensitive.
Yes. Basically it does what it should, only the "default" position
should start considerably lower, perhaps equal to the \oneVoice position.
What is "missing" from your example are rests that have spacers in the
other voice (the situation of merged rests).
Urs
_______________________________________________
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
