Re: skyline vs. y-aligned-side

[Joe Neeman]

On 1/25/07, Han-Wen Nienhuys <address@hidden> wrote:
> Hello Joe,
>
> 2 questions
>
> 1. do you see any reason to use
>
>  ly:side-position-interface::y-aligned-side
>
> for Y-offset callbacks on stuff that uses outside-staff-priority?

It makes certain user-overrides a little easier. Since
outside-staff-priority only ever pushes objects away from the staff,
you could add extra padding to an outside-staff-priority object to
give things a more uniform appearance, for example.

> If not: we could scrap that, as well as all the code necessary to
> create the side-support-elements information for those grobs.

There are certainly places where that code can be simplified -- I've
even made some changes already in my working copy. There's a bunch of
stuff that's only there to deal with collisions and that can all be
removed.
> 2. it would be cool if it were possible to position several grobs as a
> single outline. Right now, we use DynamicLineSpanner to ensure that
> all related dynamics stay on one Y position, but I suspect that it
> should be possible to use the outside-staff-prority stuff to do that.
> Do you think you could pull that off? Of course, the grobs will be marked
> so that it is possible to distinguish related  groups of dynamics.
>
> The same holds for piano pedals. If we could do this, this would simplify
> dynamics-engraver a lot, and we could scrap piano-pedal-align-engraver.

Sure, I'll give that a try. As far as distinguishing related dynamics
goes, what if each DynamicText (PianoPedal, etc.) just had a pointer
to the next related one? Then you have a lot of flexibility (in the
backend at least) because you can align arbitrary grob types (eg. a
DynamicText with a VoltaBracket).