Robert Patterson wrote:
On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 8:16 AM, Jari Williamsson
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
If you added a woodwind part and needed the same elsewhere, you could copy
the expressions from an existing woodwind staff.
Now you are just rationalizing. Clearly for this case a staff set
would be the better solution. I agree one can work around the limit. I
don't think anyone has ever said otherwise.
I just try to be practical and get a good work flow for the new design.
The staff list limit is not the issue IMO. Let's say that I _would_ have
unlimited staff lists on Fin2009. I create 4 staff lists for woodwinds,
brass, strings, and percussion. Since staff lists are now connected to
categories, I would need 4 categories as well. And that would most
probably involve multiple duplicates of expressions throughout the
categories. Which would mean:
1. Running out metatool keys pretty quickly
2. Having to check/change in up to 4 places if an expression is needed
to be modified throughout the score
So unless I haven't misunderstood something fundamental, I don't
necessarily think staff sets would be the better solution for Fin2009,
regardless of the limit.
Best regards,
Jari Williamsson
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
