On 17 Feb 2009 at 16:29, Johannes Gebauer wrote: > On 17.02.2009 David W. Fenton wrote: > > You snipped the context. I did not claim that automatic layout > > updating caused that problem, but automatic music spacing *does* > > cause the problem. And it's only if I had automatic music spacing > > turned on that the music spacing could have changed without me > > respacing the music. And that's the only thing that would have > > possibly required an update layout. > > Now I am confused, are you saying you were talking about automatic music > spacing all along? That's a completely different horse, I would not > switch that on if someone payed me to do it.
No. I brought up automatic music spacing because someone admonished me that by changing any notes that the existing layout was somehow invalidated and needed to be updated just because I changed the content of some of the measures. The only way I can think that this would be so would be if I had been working with automatic music spacing turned on (which I don't), so I can't see any reason why just changing some of the notes would invalidate the page layout and necessitate a recalc. If the changes I'd made had changed the widths of the measures, I certainly would have respaced the music manually and then updated the layout manually. But as anyone can clearly see from comparing the two PDFs, nothing I did changed any of the measure widths, so there was really no reason at all to need to update the page layout. But I only brought up automatic music spacing because that's the only conceivable reason I can think of why page layout could change just from editing a few notes that don't change any measure widths. -- David W. Fenton http://dfenton.com David Fenton Associates http://dfenton.com/DFA/ _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
