[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: LM 4.4.2 \fooDown \fooUp (and how about \textDown?)

From: Carl Sorensen
Subject: Re: LM 4.4.2 \fooDown \fooUp (and how about \textDown?)
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2010 15:22:24 -0700

On 12/21/10 1:14 PM, "Valentin Villenave" <address@hidden> wrote:

> Greetings everybody, hi Trevor,
> I've been looking at the LM 4.4.2 Placement of objects > Within-staff
> objects, and I'm not sure we want to use "Down/Left" and "Up/Right" in
> the table. Yes, we all know that -1 and 1 may respectively mean either
> "down" or "left" and either "up" or "right", but in this table we're
> *only* documenting objects that are aligned vertically!

I agree with you here.  I think it should be Down and Up in the table

> Oh, and by the way: we have \textSpannerDown for text spanners, but
> not \textDown for simple TextScript objects (that are quite likely to
> be needed by new users). Anyone against adding textDown, textUp,
> textNeutral?

Why should we add \textDown, \textUp, and \textNeutral?  TextScript is
markup text, IIUC, and markup text attached to a note is always preceded by
^ - or _, isn't it?  It seems to me that having special commands will just
cause confusion.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]