Mark Polesky wrote Wednesday, December 09, 2009 9:05 AM
Wow. It's been just over 94 (and a half) *days* since my last
transmission here. If > anyone is curious, I am still alive,
Hi Mark - good to hear it ;)
Which brings me to my question:
Currently there are 11 scripts for which 'quantize-position is set
to #t (accent
accentus circulus comma espressivo ictus marcato semicirculus
staccato tenuto
varcomma). I used my handy ly:filter-alist procedure for this (see
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2009-05/msg00438.html):
#(display (ly:filter-alist default-script-alist
'quantize-position))
In case you didn't already know, quantize-position basically means
"center this
script vertically between two staff lines so it's close to the
note head but not
touching it". However, in common practice the accent and marcato
marks are (more
often than not) kept out of the staff entirely (see Kurt Stone,
pp.5-6), ie.
quantize-position should not be set to #t for those two scripts.
It does seem to be the practice with Dover and Oxford.
Is this an oversight, or is there some reason for this? Would
there be any
opposition to removing the relevant lines in script.scm (currently
lines 24 and
149)?
I wouldn't object, but we'd need a consensus from a
reasonable number of developers.
On a related note, the excellent solution* (by Mats) for
controlling this
individually for each script (using scriptDefinitions) should go
into the docs, I
think. Are any of these places suitable?
1.3.1 Attached to notes
4.4 Placement of objects
5.4.2 Direction and placement
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2009-03/msg00210.html
Not as direct text. It would need to go in the LSR
and be tagged as "Expressive marks".
Trevor
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel