There are probably some articulations where I could use a single definition and not mind the placement, but since so many of them require two, I just keep all articulations that way for consistency.
fair enough, i agree with your points, but just wanted to point out that the auto-position functionality can be very useful in a variety of instrumental contexts. but admittedly, in vocal music you won't come across so many of these situations. however, even in vocal music, there must be some artics you want centred over the notehead and not the stem when on stem side... fermati for example?
I have a metatool scheme I'm used to.
i find sometimes with some users that habit is actually the main reason not to incorporate new functionality in their work... ;-)
If I had my way, every articulation definition would allow handle positioning numbers for each of four cases: upstem noteside, downstem noteside, upstem stemside, and downstem stemside.
yep. another dream topic.
Then I would use a single definition for each, but without that I'm just too fussy and I'd end up nudging every stemside articulation.
precision is a good thing in my books 8-)
Speaking of nudging, I'd also like each articulation definition to have an offset for when it's put over a whole note. I haven't broken down and made a separate fermata articulation for whole notes, but I probably should, since I'm always nudging them.
check "centre horizontally" _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
