Aaron et al,
New behavior has started since putting 2007a on the computer, and
today I found that the same smart shape strangeness even happens when
working in 2006c on an older document (converted from a still earlier
file). Hooked lines are un-editable. I have never encountered this
before and can't figure it out. Other smart shapes I have tried seem
unaffected.
This has nothing to do with linked parts and the associated changes
in measure size between one view and another, it just doesn't work.
Confused.
Chuck
On Dec 17, 2006, at 5:49 PM, Aaron Sherber wrote:
At 06:38 PM 12/17/2006, Rich Caldwell wrote:
>This is the main reason I cannot use the linked parts feature except
>for very simple music. The ability to adjust hairpins and smart
>lines is essential for me.
This has been brought up several times before, but it bears
repeating: linked parts can still be very useful even if you can't
do everything in one score. Many people have been in the habit of
making a score and then a 'parts score' from which parts are
extracted. With linked parts, you may still need to make a parts
score separate from your main score, but then you should be able to
use linked parts from that parts score rather than extracting.
There are many advantages to using linked parts in this way, and
because your parts score is separate from the main score, you can
change hairpins in the parts score (for the parts) without messing
up your main score.
>I've tried to understand why MM didn't
>change smart shapes so that they could be horizontally unlinked.
>But... how do measure-attached expressions work?
I'm guessing a little bit here, and if someone who knows more would
like to correct me, that's fine. A measure-attached expression has
an attachment point, which is specified in the Measure Positioning
tab. When you make any subsequent moves to the expression, in the
score or in the parts, linked or unlinked, Finale stores a
displacement from the attachment point. This displacement can be
different in the score and parts, but the base attachment point
remains the same.
For something like a hairpin, the endpoints -- where the hairpin
begins and ends -- *are* the attachment points. Finale currently
has no way of storing a horizontal displacement separate from the
horizontal attachment point. So if you move the left endpoint a
little to the right, either by moving the hairpin or just dragging
the endpoint, you're changing the base definition of the hairpin,
which affects the object in both score and parts. On the other
hand, since vertical position is not part of that base definition,
you can move a hairpin vertically in the part without affecting the
score.
It may be a litle easier to visualize if you think about a slur.
Let's say you've got a 4/4 measure with a slur from beats 1 to 3.
In the part you can lift the slur, you can stretch the slur, you
can move the endpoints around -- and the slur will nicely unlink
from the score, with Finale storing all of those positional
displacements. But if you take the slur in the part and change the
right endpoint so it's attached to beat 4 instead of beat 3, now
you've changed the base definition of the slur, and it will affect
the score as well. In other words, Finale can store different
displacements for a slur endpoint relative to a common attachment
point for that endpoint (e.g., beat 3), but it can't store two
different attachment points.
Again, I'm not defending the way things work as ideal for
engravers, and I'm not saying that future versions of Finale can't
or shouldn't refine the mechanism. I'm just explaining from the
program's point of view why (I think) the current behavior is as it
is.
Aaron.
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Chuck Israels
230 North Garden Terrace
Bellingham, WA 98225-5836
phone (360) 671-3402
fax (360) 676-6055
www.chuckisraels.com
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
