Re: New predefined command

[Graham Percival]

On Sun, 22 Jun 2008 19:02:10 -0700
"Patrick McCarty" <address@hidden> wrote:

> On Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 6:26 PM, Graham Percival <address@hidden>
> wrote:
> > On Sun, 22 Jun 2008 18:02:11 -0700
> > "Patrick McCarty" <address@hidden> wrote:
> >>
> >> Actually, there are currently five possible states: default, up,
> >> down, bracket, and parenthesis.  So we need to find a solution
> >> that will take everything into account.
> >>
> >> How about a compromise? -- Keep \arpeggioNeutral, but only use it
> >> to revert \arpeggioUp and \arpeggioDown.  Then use \..Up and
> >> \..Down commands for the bracket and parenthesis states:
> >>
> >> \arpeggioUp
> >> \arpeggioDown
> >> \arpeggioNeutral
> >> \arpeggioBracketOn
> >> \arpeggioBracketOff
> >> \arpeggioParenOn
> >> \arpeggioParenOff
> >>
> >> How does this look?
> >
> > The confusion arises because \*Up, \*Down, \*Neutral are generally
> > used for directions -- ie above or below the staff.  There's two
> > decisions to make:
> >
> > 1.  Should we re-use these direction-commands to produce
> > non-direction symbols?  I would say no.
> 
> Thanks for clarifying this point.  I agree.
> 
> > 2.  If not, how do we indicate the 5 states listed above?
> > \arpeggioNormal
> > \arpeggioPointUp
> > \arpeggioPointDown
> > \arpeggioBracket
> > \arpeggioParenthesis
> 
> "Point" is okay.  Another possibility could be "ArrowUp" and
> "ArrowDown".

I like Arrow better.

>  I like \arpeggioNormal, but if it is intended to be a
> "generic" command, it would need to include reverts for the 'stencil,
> 'arpeggio-direction, and 'X-extent properties.  This isn't ideal, but
> it might be a workable solution.

Err... well, it would revert any properties modified by any of the
above commands.  I don't know what that entails.  I can't imagine
this being a problem, though.  I mean, I can't imagine somebody
using \arpeggioArrowUp, modifying the 'X-extent to some other
value, and then getting confused why \arpeggioNormal removed the
X-extent.  Dump a sentence in the docs about this, but really...
the kind of people who do their own tweaks can figure this out on
their own.

In other words: if somebody doesn't make their own tweaks, would
\arpeggioNormal (as described) produce any confusion?  No?  Ok,
then we're good to go.

Cheers,
- Graham