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
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
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
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,
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
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
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
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,
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
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:
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
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
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
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
14 matches
Mail list logo
