Hi Karin, i'm back from my short vacation.
2011/6/17 <karin.hoeth...@googlemail.com>: > the description explains clearly how to use the parameters gap and woot. > So, it is a good starting point to understanding the scheme code that > follows. Good! >> Yes, the quanting stays the same. > > I couldn't find the verb "to quant" in a dictionary. Is it short for > "to quantize"? Yes. It's used a lot in beaming code. > If so, it might be clearer to change the description in output-lib.scm. Good point, it's better to avoid abbreviations. > Finally, I tested the gap adjustment for several intervals. For a fifth: > > \new Staff \with { \consists Ambitus_engraver } { > c' g' > } > > the bottom of the ambitus line is very close to the lower note in the > default case. Is this on purpose? I would expect the ambitus line to be > more or less centered between note heads. Have you zoomed the output to check it? I suppose its a rasterization problem; a lot of things seem to be wrong when output is watched unzoomed on a computer screen (for example one stem in the attachment looks two times thicker than the other, while in fact it's exactly the same). Thanks for review! Janek
<<attachment: bad rasterization.png>>
_______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel