Re: top-margin bug?

[Joe Neeman]

On Mon, 2009-07-27 at 13:54 -0700, Patrick McCarty wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 08:32:55PM +0000, Werner wrote:
> > Patrick McCarty <pnorcks <at> gmail.com> writes:
> > > Since those measurements are in staff-spaces, the conversion to
> > > millimeters is as follows:
> > > 
> > >   4.84 * 5 * 25.4 / 72.27 = 8.5mm = 0.85cm
> > 
> > I set 
> > #(set-global-staff-size 16.5)
> > in my example.
> > That's why i got :0.69 (or *1.4493=16.5/4*25.4/72.27) 
> >                                    ^^^^
> > instead of *1.7573=20/4*25.4/72.27) (with 20/4=5)
> >                    ^^
> 
> Okay, I see.  So the measurements are correct, right?
> 
> > We have in NR:
> > 
> > head-separation
> > Distance between the top-most music system and the page header. Default: 
> > 4\mm.
> > 
> > Isn't it true to write:
> > Distance between the title (if exists) or the top-most music system (if 
> > there is
> > no title) and the page header. Default: 4\mm.
> > ??
> 
> I just did some tests, and I think it's more complicated than that.  I
> just made a commit with a revised description:
> 
> http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/lilypond.git/commit/?id=e3769c18a0fe9755036361993e5b60f486cf35b3
> 
> Is this any better?

Looking at your description, maybe I'll go back on what I said earlier
about not touching head-separation (sorry). The new spacing code has the
properties first-system-spacing and first-system-title-spacing that can
control stretchable space and minimum distance between the top margin
and the first music system or title. They can also specify padding
between the header and the first music system/title.

It seems like that would obsolete head-separation, right? So I'll
probably just remove it.

Joe