On Thu, 2008-10-30 at 21:53 +1100, Cameron Horsburgh wrote:
In short, I'm stumped!
Any ideas?
So I had a look at the file you sent off-list and it turns out that the
unevenness is being caused by poor extent-estimates. A workaround is to
set VerticalAxisGroup #'minimum-Y-extent to #'(-4 . 4).
On Thu, 2008-10-30 at 21:53 +1100, Cameron Horsburgh wrote:
On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 07:46:16AM +1100, Cameron Horsburgh wrote:
On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 05:00:17PM +0100, Mats Bengtsson wrote:
Hmm, I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks it's strange! And it's
nothing recent either---it's
On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 07:46:16AM +1100, Cameron Horsburgh wrote:
On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 05:00:17PM +0100, Mats Bengtsson wrote:
Hmm, I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks it's strange! And it's
nothing recent either---it's been a problem since I first put the
score together, which
Hi folks,
If you open
http://web.netcall.com.au/horsburgh/Downloads/entertainer.pdf you'll
find a score I did a few years back. I've never been happy with the
way the systems are spaced on each page.
If you look at the pages 4 and 8 you'll notice that the staves are far
more spread out
I'm sure you have already tried
\paper { annotate-spacing = ##t }
to get some hints on what's going on. See 4.6.1 Displaying spacing in
the Notation reference.
Once difference I could notice between pages 3 and 4 is that you have a
dynamic indication \mf
for some staves on page 4, that you
On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 05:00:17PM +0100, Mats Bengtsson wrote:
I'm sure you have already tried
\paper { annotate-spacing = ##t }
to get some hints on what's going on. See 4.6.1 Displaying spacing in
the Notation reference.
Once difference I could notice between pages 3 and 4 is that you
