[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: ottava signs
Re: ottava signs
Wed, 2 Oct 2019 11:27:55 +0200
> … Instead of using nested “if”s you could use cond:
> I’m not 100% sure about the italian either but I think it’s
> 8th = ottava → 8va
> 15th = quindicesima → 15ma
> 22nd = ventiduesima → 22ma
> 29th = ventinovesima → 29ma
According to https://www.deepl.com/translator
(ok, not the best references, but consistent) it goes on with
-simo/-sima. Probably more constrained by the instruments than by the
italian language :)
>> 2. nice line spanners (top- or bottom-aligned, dotted etc.)
> That’s what Gould recommends, yes. But I’m not sure how to implement this:
> One could
> a) use a single number/direction for “alta” ottavations and mirror it for
> “bassa” → somehow inflexible and if you use a direction, it’s also confusing.
> b) use a pair of numbers/directions → looks complicated but IMO better than
> c) don’t have a grob property for that at all but just take the “natural”
> alignment of the markup. You then would need to set everything different from
> bottom-aligned by hand as in
> \set Staff.ottavation = \markup \general-align #Y #UP "15"
> For cases a) and b) we would need a good name for that grob property. Any
> I find case c) the most elegant *iff* you don’t set ottavation by hand. This
> would also need a good convert-ly rule for those who set it by hand in the
IIUC, c) is too fragile as you don’t know what the user defines for his
markup. There are different vertical line positions in
https://notat.io/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=522 and even though the bassa
variants are not listed, I guess a pair of numbers is the better,
because more flexible solution.
Here are some naming propositions just from the top of my head:
OttavaBracket.line-positions (plural hints at the pair of numbers)
>> However, the reasoning in the SMuFL 1.3 specifications ("Implementation
>> notes") about "ma" vs. "mb" convinced me that 15mb does not make sense
>> and I’d suggest to use 15ma etc. as default setting.
> Hm … Gould recommends 15ma and 22da (see above for 22ma vs. 22da) and lists
> 8va, 8ba, 8va bassa as alternatives but not 8vb. I’ll search for real-world
> engraved examples.
Well, which is consistent with the above resoning, isn’t it?
8va/15ma also for bassa. Alternatively, 8ba or 8va bassa. But not
8vb/15mb even if it exists.
>> I would even change the style to bold italic.
> This has nothing to do with ottavationMarkups, you can \override
> Staff.OttavaBracket.font-series = #'bold and it will show the desired effect.
> But maybe we should make this the default, yes.
Yes, "… by default" was missing in my sentence. Of course, it’s easy to
change as you say and I would not let the "bold italic by default"
decision interfere with the other good changes you propose.
> Combining these findings with those by John Ruggero
> (https://notat.io/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=522) I’d vote for numbers only as
> a default. I’ll make another patch set.
+1 for numbers as default. That’s also what I found in scores (Schott,
Boosey & Hawkes) when I looked for it some time ago.
Will the new patch allow for easy way (without manually specifying all
the markups) to switch to suffixed numbers (8va etc.)?
Re: ottava signs, foxfanfare, 2019/10/11