On 4 Jun 2004 at 18:55, Christopher BJ Smith wrote:
I suppose this amounts to a different philosophy about what I want my notation program to do.
You seem to assume a number of things:
1. layout in the linked part would not be as fully adjustable as layout in an extracted part.
I didn't assume that at all (except in the case of Sibelius, where parts inherit score layout, and possibly in the case of Igor, where I read between the lines from the presentation on the website).
I just think that if you are going to have to re-jig almost every aspect of your part layout once you change something, why not just re-extract parts again?
2. the implementation of such a feature would be accompanied by the removal of the current part extraction capability.
Actually, we kind of have that feature already. I don't use it, and neither does anyone else I know, possibly because it IS implemented in a stupid fashion (or at least a not-very-useful fashion). In a score with the Staff tool selected, click on a clef to select the staff, then go to the Edit menu and check Special Part Extraction. In scroll view, nothing happens, you still see the whole score. In Page view, the staff is alone and extracted. No new file, all changes to the part are immediately reflected in the score and vice versa (just turn off Special Part Extraction or else go to Scroll View to see the whole score.) PRint as you like, change staves to go to another part. I don't see the use of this feature, for most of the reasons I have already stated.
Why is it that whenever someone proposes what are obvious changes to Finale that would make it much, much easier to use that so many people argue against the change on the grounds that it would be implemented in the most stupid fashion imaginable?
I dunno, previous experience? (Lyric Tool, Ossia Tool, Midi Tool, certain aspects of the Repeat Tool, to name a few.)
Christopher _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
