Re: [Finale] Feature request (#3 in a series)
On 12.07.2003 21:42 Uhr, Patsy Moore wrote > Ah, that sounds as if having a 2-line expression is now already a > regular option. I'm still using FinWin 2000c. Perhaps we should be > beginning to think _seriously_ about updating... No, this is not a feature of 2k3. Johannes -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Feature request (#3 in a series)
Not only line breaks, but other text manipulation as in text blocks, especially justification (which is not necessary with a single line). Along those lines, I wonder why it is not possible to manipulate character positioning in lyrics. I've often had situations where it would be nice...time to email Coda--er, MM. Tim ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Feature request (#3 in a series)
On Saturday, July 12, 2003, at 05:06 PM, Lee Actor wrote: However, as I like to think of myself as a frugal individual, if a switch can be set so that these are ignored in some places, but not in others, then one can get by with one expression instead of two. Yes, but at the expense of an unfrugal and excessive case of feature-itis. I'll take CR's in expressions, thank you very much. But the special case you mention is too obscure to have a feature dedicated to it, when it can be handled quite easily (and, IMO, more cleanly) by defining two different expressions. What Lee said. [Sorry for the "me too," but Lee just made my own reply to Noel irrelevant.] - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Boston MA No one likes us I don't know why We may not be perfect But heaven knows we try But all around, even our old friends put us down Let's drop the Big One and see what happens - Randy Newman, "Political Science" ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Feature request (#3 in a series)
On 12 Jul 2003 at 15:15, Noel Stoutenburg wrote:
> Darcy James Argue wrote, with respect to having optional CR-LF's::
>
> > I don't understand the desire for
> > *optional* line breaks, when it's so easy to change from one to the
> > other (duplicate one and turn it into the other). Seems like a awful
> > amount of extra programming work for a cumbersome, non-intuitive,
> > non-user friendly feature. ("I *hit* return, dammit, why doesn't the
> > line break show up on screen???")
>
> While I don't have access to the code, it seems to me that the optional line
> feed is merely an extension of the principle under which allowing individual
> positioning already exists. You can allow it at one point, and not at
> another. I think the CR-LF could perhaps make use of the same code, so the
> programming to make it optional would not be that much of an effort. Even
> so, I could live with having CR-LF not being optional, as long as it could be
> entered.
I'm confused about this whole discussion.
So far as I can see, the only way to have a CR/LF in a Finale
expression is to use the shape designer.
I also simply don't comprehend the utility of having the line feed be
optional or not. How would that help in a particular file? You'd have
all or nothing, since there is no override setting available for
individual instances of expressions.
Now, if expressions were treated as class objects that could could be
based on other expressions, that would be a different matter (this is
the way it ought to be in the first place, in my opinion). But right
now, you're asking for not 1 new thing but for 2 -- the ability to
have a carriage return in an expression and the ability to have
certain aspects of an expression ignored in some instances of the
same expression within a particular file.
I simply don't see the point.
And your speculations about how difficult the programming might be
are completely off-base -- you have no right to be speculating on
such things as you haven't sufficient knowledge of the problem space
to have an informed opinion.
I strongly doubt that what you are requesting would be possible at
all without some alteration of the data structures used for storing
expressions, and that's a pretty major thing.
Indeed, I don't find a single one of your feature requests to be of
any utility whatsoever. It seems to me that you are mis-using
expressions for purposes they were not intended.
One thing I *would* like to see in expressions is the ability to
change fonts without having to resort to the shape designer. I'd
especially like the ability to have non-printing characters (the
things in brackets) show up in a specified font onscreen, instead of
the music font.
--
David W. Fentonhttp://www.bway.net/~dfenton
David Fenton Associateshttp://www.bway.net/~dfassoc
___
Finale mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
RE: [Finale] Feature request (#3 in a series)
> Well, first and foremost I'd like to see the capability of linebreaks; if > the mechanism were introduced it's certainly feasible to create two > expressions, one without embedded CR-LF's, and the other one with, and use > the appropriate one at each point. However, as I like to think > of myself as > a frugal individual, if a switch can be set so that these are ignored in > some places, but not in others, then one can get by with one expression > instead of two. > > ns Yes, but at the expense of an unfrugal and excessive case of feature-itis. I'll take CR's in expressions, thank you very much. But the special case you mention is too obscure to have a feature dedicated to it, when it can be handled quite easily (and, IMO, more cleanly) by defining two different expressions. -Lee ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Feature request (#3 in a series)
Darcy wrote, in part, enquiring: > Do you mean that you would allow line breaks on some staves and not > others? I hadn't thought about that bit. I was thinking more about a lengty text expression that occurs several times in the same score, where in a couple places it needs to be compressed by breaking the string in two, and stacking the former part on top of the latter. Upon selection of such an expression, if it contains an embedded CR-LF, in the same dialog box as one presently finds "allow individual positioning", one would also see an option "ignore embedded CR-LF". I suppose it could get really fancy, and be made to work in conjunction with "allow individual positioning", but I'm not really asking for that much. > And what is the advantage over simply allowing line breaks in text > expressions, *period*? Where is the advantage over having two copies > of the same expression, one with line breaks and one without? Well, first and foremost I'd like to see the capability of linebreaks; if the mechanism were introduced it's certainly feasible to create two expressions, one without embedded CR-LF's, and the other one with, and use the appropriate one at each point. However, as I like to think of myself as a frugal individual, if a switch can be set so that these are ignored in some places, but not in others, then one can get by with one expression instead of two. ns ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Feature request (#3 in a series)
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Harold Owen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >Noel Stoutenburg: > >> > > If not implemented in FIN 2k4, one thing I would like to see in 2k5 is >> > > the ability to embed non-printing, optional carriage return / linefeed >> > > sequences (hereinafter, CR-LFs) in text expressions. >Me: > >I would use one expression without the line feed. In places where I >want the line feed, all I have to do is add it to the expression once >entered - which seems simpler than having two expressions or having >to deal with Noel's suggested feature. Ah, that sounds as if having a 2-line expression is now already a regular option. I'm still using FinWin 2000c. Perhaps we should be beginning to think _seriously_ about updating... Patsy -- Patsy Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Feature request (#3 in a series)
Of course. And, you're right about text blocks. (duh, that wasn't too bright of me.) But I suppose I misunderstood NS's original post, which he later clarified. I was further confused by your use of the term "linefeed", which to me has a specific technical meaning. I agree with NS and Darcy that we should be able to have line breaks in text expressions as we do in text blocks. But, I'm still waiting for unicode in text expressions and lyrics ... At 10:11 PM 7/12/2003 +0200, Jari Williamsson wrote: >Bruce K H Kau writes: > >> FWIW The interpretation of CR and LF is different between Macs and PCs. >> >> [...] >> >> Not sure how Finale would deal with all these differences. > >There shouldn't be a technical issue regarding line breaks here. Finale >already deals with line breaks in text blocks (which converts correctly >between platforms), for example. > > >Best regards, > >Jari Williamsson >___ >Finale mailing list >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale > - Bruce K. H. Kau[EMAIL PROTECTED] Kane'ohe, Hawai'i, USA "Second star to the right, and straight on 'til morning ..." ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Feature request (#3 in a series)
On Saturday, July 12, 2003, at 04:15 PM, Noel Stoutenburg wrote:
I don't understand the desire for
*optional* line breaks, when it's so easy to change from one to the
other (duplicate one and turn it into the other). Seems like a awful
amount of extra programming work for a cumbersome, non-intuitive,
non-user friendly feature. ("I *hit* return, dammit, why doesn't the
line break show up on screen???")
While I don't have access to the code, it seems to me that the
optional line
feed is merely an extension of the principle under which allowing
individual
positioning already exists. You can allow it at one point, and not at
another.
Do you mean that you would allow line breaks on some staves and not
others? Would this mean adding another two columns to the staff set
dialog -- "Show line breaks in score" and "Show line breaks in parts"?
What UI do you have in mind for this?
And what is the advantage over simply allowing line breaks in text
expressions, *period*? Where is the advantage over having two copies
of the same expression, one with line breaks and one without?
- Darcy
-
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Boston MA
No one likes us
I don't know why
We may not be perfect
But heaven knows we try
But all around, even our old friends put us down
Let's drop the Big One and see what happens
- Randy Newman, "Political Science"
___
Finale mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Feature request (#3 in a series)
Darcy James Argue wrote, with respect to having optional CR-LF's::
> I don't understand the desire for
> *optional* line breaks, when it's so easy to change from one to the
> other (duplicate one and turn it into the other). Seems like a awful
> amount of extra programming work for a cumbersome, non-intuitive,
> non-user friendly feature. ("I *hit* return, dammit, why doesn't the
> line break show up on screen???")
While I don't have access to the code, it seems to me that the optional line
feed is merely an extension of the principle under which allowing individual
positioning already exists. You can allow it at one point, and not at
another. I think the CR-LF could perhaps make use of the same code, so the
programming to make it optional would not be that much of an effort. Even
so, I could live with having CR-LF not being optional, as long as it could be
entered.
As to MAC and WIN treating CR-LF differently, I was using the sequence as a
means of discussing what I want, and did not mean to imply that any specific
sequence of character codes necessarily needed to be used.
ns
___
Finale mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Feature request (#3 in a series)
Bruce K H Kau writes: > FWIW The interpretation of CR and LF is different between Macs and PCs. > > [...] > > Not sure how Finale would deal with all these differences. There shouldn't be a technical issue regarding line breaks here. Finale already deals with line breaks in text blocks (which converts correctly between platforms), for example. Best regards, Jari Williamsson ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Feature request (#3 in a series)
On Saturday, July 12, 2003, at 09:26 AM, Bruce K H Kau wrote:
FWIW The interpretation of CR and LF is different between Macs and PCs.
On a PC, a CR-LF combination is necessary to end a line. The CR only
brings
the "cursor" to the beginning of the current line, and the LF advances
to
the next line. As I understand, on a Mac, a CR performs both
functions. And,
to add to the confusion, on Unix/Linux et al, a LF is a "line
delimiter" so
it is considered the equivalent of the PC's CF-LF.
Not sure how Finale would deal with all these differences.
Again, I'm with Jari on this. I don't understand the desire for
*optional* line breaks, when it's so easy to change from one to the
other (duplicate one and turn it into the other). Seems like a awful
amount of extra programming work for a cumbersome, non-intuitive,
non-user friendly feature. ("I *hit* return, dammit, why doesn't the
line break show up on screen???")
- Darcy
-
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Boston MA
No one likes us
I don't know why
We may not be perfect
But heaven knows we try
But all around, even our old friends put us down
Let's drop the Big One and see what happens
- Randy Newman, "Political Science"
___
Finale mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
RE: [Finale] Feature request (#3 in a series)
Noel Stoutenburg: > > > > If not implemented in FIN 2k4, one thing I would like > to see in 2k5 is > > > > the ability to embed non-printing, optional carriage > return / linefeed > > > > sequences (hereinafter, CR-LFs) in text expressions. Jari Williamsson: > > > Why would the line feed has to be optional? Sounds to me > like if you need > > > a line feed, you'll add it. If you don't need it, you > don't add it. Or am I > > > missing something here? Noel: > >I can think of a number of scores where in most places one > would not need the > >line feed, but in a few places it is required. Making the > CR-LF optional > >allows the use of one text expression instead of two. I see > it as a logical > >application of the principal of which the "allow individual > positioning" is a > >current example. Harold Owen: > I would use one expression without the line feed. In places where I > want the line feed, all I have to do is add it to the expression once > entered - which seems simpler than having two expressions or having > to deal with Noel's suggested feature. Me: But that simply wouldn't work. You cannot modify an expression that has been placed without changing all other placements of that expression. The only notable exception is shape expressions that have been placed with metatools, as Finale will then duplicate the shape in Shape Designer so that such individual modifications are possible. No way to do that with a text expression, though. Add text to one instance; all instances are affected. However, I have absolutely no qualms with having two expressions. I admit that CR-LFs in expressions would be TREMENDOUSLY useful, but two nearly equivalent expressions are in no way a problem. TGTools' Text Expression Sorter all but eliminates any confusion by alphabetizing the list and thereby moving the two expressions right next to each other in the dialog. - Brad Beyenhof [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Feature request (#3 in a series)
FWIW The interpretation of CR and LF is different between Macs and PCs. On a PC, a CR-LF combination is necessary to end a line. The CR only brings the "cursor" to the beginning of the current line, and the LF advances to the next line. As I understand, on a Mac, a CR performs both functions. And, to add to the confusion, on Unix/Linux et al, a LF is a "line delimiter" so it is considered the equivalent of the PC's CF-LF. Not sure how Finale would deal with all these differences. At 03:24 PM 7/12/2003 +0200, Jari Williamsson wrote: >Noel Stoutenburg writes: > >> If not implemented in FIN 2k4, one thing I would like to see in 2k5 is >> the ability to embed non-printing, optional carriage return / linefeed >> sequences (hereinafter, CR-LFs) in text expressions. > >Why would the line feed has to be optional? Sounds to me like if you need >a line feed, you'll add it. If you don't need it, you don't add it. Or am I >missing something here? > > >Best regards, > >Jari Williamsson >___ >Finale mailing list >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale > - Bruce K. H. Kau[EMAIL PROTECTED] Kane'ohe, Hawai'i, USA "Second star to the right, and straight on 'til morning ..." ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Feature request (#3 in a series)
Noel Stoutenburg: > > If not implemented in FIN 2k4, one thing I would like to see in 2k5 is > > the ability to embed non-printing, optional carriage return / linefeed > > sequences (hereinafter, CR-LFs) in text expressions. Jari Williamsson: > Why would the line feed has to be optional? Sounds to me like if you need > a line feed, you'll add it. If you don't need it, you don't add it. Or am I > missing something here? Noel: I can think of a number of scores where in most places one would not need the line feed, but in a few places it is required. Making the CR-LF optional allows the use of one text expression instead of two. I see it as a logical application of the principal of which the "allow individual positioning" is a current example. Me: I would use one expression without the line feed. In places where I want the line feed, all I have to do is add it to the expression once entered - which seems simpler than having two expressions or having to deal with Noel's suggested feature. Hal -- Harold Owen 2830 Emerald St., Eugene, OR 97403 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit my web site at: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~hjowen FAX: (509) 461-3608 ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Feature request (#3 in a series)
Jari Williamsson wrote: > Noel Stoutenburg writes: > > > If not implemented in FIN 2k4, one thing I would like to see in 2k5 is > > the ability to embed non-printing, optional carriage return / linefeed > > sequences (hereinafter, CR-LFs) in text expressions. > > Why would the line feed has to be optional? Sounds to me like if you need > a line feed, you'll add it. If you don't need it, you don't add it. Or am I > missing something here? I can think of a number of scores where in most places one would not need the line feed, but in a few places it is required. Making the CR-LF optional allows the use of one text expression instead of two. I see it as a logical application of the principal of which the "allow individual positioning" is a current example. ns ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Feature request (#3 in a series)
Noel Stoutenburg writes: > If not implemented in FIN 2k4, one thing I would like to see in 2k5 is > the ability to embed non-printing, optional carriage return / linefeed > sequences (hereinafter, CR-LFs) in text expressions. Why would the line feed has to be optional? Sounds to me like if you need a line feed, you'll add it. If you don't need it, you don't add it. Or am I missing something here? Best regards, Jari Williamsson ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] Feature request (#3 in a series)
To whom it may concern: If not implemented in FIN 2k4, one thing I would like to see in 2k5 is the ability to embed non-printing, optional carriage return / linefeed sequences (hereinafter, CR-LFs) in text expressions. When one defines a text expression, it should be possible to insert a symbol for carriage return line feed, and in the dialog box used in placing text expressions, there should be a check box that, if selected, would ignore embedded CR-LFs. Thus, if I create the text expression, "Energetically, with great motion CR-LF but not too fast" when I assign the expression, I am given the option of ignoring the embedded CR-LF. If I choose to ignore the CR-LF, the score shows "Energeticlly, with great motion but not too fast" If I don't ignore the CR-LF, the score shows "Energetically, with great motion but not too fast" ns ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
