On 2010/07/04 20:36:28, janneke-list_xs4all.nl wrote:
It does. The symbol order does determine the priority.
Hmm, this doesn't appear to be the case, since key signatures are preferred over time signatures for aligning.
Problem is, at start of a stave the *only* symbol that is present is the staff bar.
Ah, good point. :) It would prevent aligning on notes.
> > Okay...so I've added the break-aligned-interface. It makes sense > > to have this position added - this is probably not the only symbol > > that we want positioned like this? > > I'm still confused as to why it's necessary, since it's only useful
for
> ordering break-aligned grobs inside the stave; ditto for the
defaults
> for 'break-align-symbol and 'break-align-symbols.
It is not necessary, we could scrap both of these. I figure however, that when adding break-aligned-ness to other engravers (text-spanner etc), it could would be nice if they could make use of mm-rest's alignment position. Possibly it's better to remove both and add when needed -- I don't know.
I'd rather remove them, since it's likely to cause confusion among users. Below, I've suggested adding 'non-musical, since it improves spacing for full-bar rests: there's currently a bit of extra space added between the non-musical and musical paper columns. http://codereview.appspot.com/1579041/show _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
