On Wednesday 22 August 2007 21:30, Valentin Villenave wrote: > 2007/8/22, Joe Neeman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > No, because TimeSignature already accepts an interface > > (break-aligned-interface) that determines its horizontal position; it > > wouldn't make sense for it to accept another one. The cleanest way of > > getting this functionality into the lilypond core, in my opinion, would > > be to create a whole new grob class. > > Thank you for your explanations; I'm not yet completely familiar with > all this stuff, but I'm getting closer. > > Is it silly to suggest that maybe the break-aligned-interface itself > could accept some reference symbols?
The objects with break-aligned-interface can't accept reference symbols because they _are_ the reference symbols. > Besides, can you explain why, in > http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.11/Documentation/user/lilypond-internals-big-pag >e#break_002daligned_002dinterface the "user settable properties" mentions > the "old" > break-align-symbol (symbol) > syntax, and how it could (or couldn't) be used to align such grobs as > TimeSignatures, which depends on break-aligned-interface? Yes, this double use of break-align-symbol is a little confusing. In the break-aligned-interface, break-align-symbol is for naming the reference point. That is, a TimeSignature has break-align-symbol set to 'time-sig. Then, if a RehearsalMark has break-align-symbols set to '(time-sig), it will align itself on the TimeSignature. Cheers, Joe _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user