On Tuesday, 13 July 1999, drarn writes:
> quote:)
> pl 56.jcn3
> - slur de-hairification
> * slurs always attached to noteheads, by default
> * corrections for steep and high slurs
> * snap to stem end when close <<== *please* do not support the
> odious practice of putting short slurs over beams.
i) We'd like to support everything: the user should be in command.
ii) Having said that, we don't plan to do thing wrong on purpose/by default.
> The slur should be
> pushed toward
> the end of the stem as necessary, and the stem should lengthen enough to
> accomodate it if there are beams.
Huh? I think I don't understand. You want to have
A)
======
| __ |
|/ \|
x| x|
instead of this:
B) ___
/ \
======
| |
x| x|
* I haven't seen A), ever.
* What if a slur spans three or more notes?
* Fine engraving, schott, baerenreiter etc use B)
* Note that B) will only be used if there's another voice on
the staff. Usually,
C)
=====
| |
x| x|
\__/
will be used
> Admit that the pianist's phrase mark
> or long
> slur should be treated differently from a guitar player's short slur.
> (The
> winds need both.)
Please elude, with references, if possible.
> There is all kinds of bad stuff that has arisen from the laziness of
> programmer-typesetters, the most egregious of which is the dotted rest.
> If OSU says dotted rests are ok, lose OSU.
Browsing through some fine music, I cannot seem to find any dotted rests.
Maybe Lily should issue a warning i). --> TODO
> $/4 instead of ?/4. Unfortunately, I also saw a key
> change reminder inside repeat signs, which is not good. What if the
Ok -> TODO
> For tuplets, engravers used to use curved lines with beams and brackets
> with stems.
> This was never really good, and present practice is much worse. I
* 'This was never really good', is that an expression of your taste,
or do you have references?
* What is 'present practise'?
> propose that all tuplets
> be bracketed in this fashion: \_3_/ (put the 3 in the gap). I originated
> this long ago, and subsequently found that this superior practice had
> been in use for
> some time in Filipino pop music.
You may send a patch, if you like.
> Unfortunately, bad music typesetting
> standards
> have stopped evolution, at least *everywhere* *but* *here*.
> Indention is only a good idea if you are going to name the instrument
> or
> voice in the space provided.
I cannot remember to have seen unindented music, ever.
> What if you have 8 different compositions
> on one page?
Maybe because musicians need to identify the start of each piece at a glance.
Anyway, you can set the indentation, eg:
\paper{ indent = 0.0\mm }
> I saw some lilypond-produced guitar music without an octave clef. Every
> transposition should have its own modification to the clef. There is
> fresh meat for type designers, to keep them out of mischief, such as
> making lines
> too faint and dots too small because they think it looks elegant.
> The standard diameter for an augmentation dot is about 30% of a staff
> line.
[I take it, you mean staffspace (ie: the interline distance)]
By what standard? Wanske says 1/2 staffspace, iirc.
> It is too small. 50% is not too large, but IMHO and in the opinion of
> others who are more experienced than I 40% would be an excellent
> compromise.
Feta uses 50%, so you're happy?
Permit me to doubt if two
> typeface maintainers are enough.
Enough for what? Expert music programmers are invited to join
and provide the world (ie, Lily :-) with the fruit of their wisdom.
> I saved the worst for last. When a staff has multiple parts and a note
> with
> stem down is on a line, the dot should go in the space below rather than
> the space
> above. Both the Encore and Finale programmers got this wrong, and
> workarounds are
> very tedious. Gardner Read did not know this rule, and his failure to
> correct his
> book is inexcusable. Notice that the Finns (Sibelius) do it right.
Seems right. We'll add to the TODO.
Greetings,
Jan.
Jan Nieuwenhuizen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | GNU LilyPond - The music typesetter
http://www.xs4all.nl/~jantien/ | http://www.lilypond.org/
