Re: Questions about articulation settings for the GDP

[Mats Bengtsson]

Graham Percival wrote:
> Eyolf Østrem wrote:
>
> > 1. Automatic placement. I think there should  be a brief note about
> > what the rules are for how they are placed by default. Opposite of the
> > stem? How about polyphony? According to the voice number?
>
> I think the best answer is to experiment -- make up examples with and 
> without polyphony (or perhaps simply altering \voiceOne to \voiceTwo 
> or no command at all), give it a bunch of articulations, and see what 
> happens.
Actually, the answer is different for different articulations. Some, 
like  \fermata
are always placed above the stave, whereas others like \accent are placed
opposite to the stem. All this is specified in the file scm/script.scm.


> > 2. I've tried to work with different values for crescendoSpanner, but
> > there is no difference between line and dashed-line -- they both
> > produce a dashed line. Here's the example from the manual (ran with v.
> > 2.11.34):
> >
> > \set crescendoText = \markup { \italic "cresc. poco" }
> > \set crescendoSpanner = #'line
> > a'2\< a a a a a a a\!\mf
>
> My first thought was that this could be an old format, but running it 
> through convert-ly (guessing at version 2.10.0) didn't improve it.
>
> Mats?  I haven't looked at this in detail; is this a bug or changed 
> syntax?
I think it's a bug, see 
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-lilypond/2005-06/msg00181.html
A workaround is mentioned in the section on Text Spanners in the manual.
See also the documentation program reference for line-interface.

Actually, the true bug is maybe that you can set style both to #'line 
and #'dashed-line,
whereas the difference in fact is determined by another property.

   /Mats