Re: Feature request: attach notation elements to barlines

[Jamie Bullock]

Hi,

Trevor, thanks for summarising this so coherently.

On Thu, 2008-01-17 at 17:50 -0600, Trevor Bača wrote:

> 
> The array of posts here have been pretty interesting. Reading through
> everything the last couple of nights, I'm realizing that we've got a
> couple of related topics in the thread. Some unpacking: 
> 
> 
> * Jamie started the thread and was looking for four separate
> affordances ...
> 
>    |\fermata       - place a fermata over a barline
>    |\!             - end a (de)crescendo at a barline
>    |\sustainUp     - end pedalling at a barline 
>    |\stopTextSpan  - end a text spanner over a barline
> 
> 
> Mats and Graham addressed Jamie's points this way:
> 
> * Mats pointed out that fermatas can position over (or under) barlines
> so long as you set them as marks ... and abide by the restriction of
> precisely which staves it is that rehearsal marks govern. 
>
> * Graham pointed out that there's a context setting hairpinToBarline
> documented in Dynamics (at 1.3.1).
> 
> * Mats pointed out that spanners now implement a 'to-barline property
> and provided an example for piano pedal marks but added that he wasn't
> able to get the effecting working for text spanners (thus addressing
> Jamie's third and fourth points, with a yes and no, respectively). 
> 
[snip]

> At this point, I *think* (though I'm not certain) that Jamie can
> accomplish three of the four tasks that opened the thread. (Jamie, is
> this now the case?) 

Yes, but with caveats. Maybe I should file some of these as bug reports?

1. I can accomplish the 'pedal to a barline' perfectly using
'to-barline, although I do get the following warning (version: 2.10.33):

--
warning: can't find property type-check for
`to-barline' (backend-type?).  perhaps a typing error?
--

2. 'to-barline and hairpinToBarline = ##t only seem to work if the
'following' note doesn't have a dynamic mark:

        \set hairpinToBarline = ##t
        a1\< |
        b4\!\f

Here the hairpin goes right up to the b4.

3. As noted previously 'to-barline doesn't work at all for TextSpanner

The attached example illustrates some of these issues.

> Comparing Kieren's "durated" spanners with my "capped" spanners, I
> think the two ideas address different concerns and also go nicely
> together. My "capped" spanners try to create a notation that is
> admittedly not standard but also something of a generalization of the
> layout of hairpins (and other spanners). Kieren's "durated" spanners
> go to the heart of the problem of where spanning elements actually
> *stop* and *start*, seeking a way to free the starts and stops of
> spanners from the notes and rests to which they attach. 
[snip]
> And I'm also realizing that what I really am asking for with my capped
> spanners is preicsely the more exacting "bounds control" Kieren's
> speaking of ... which makes me realize that I'll really have to sit
> down and work out a suggested set of interface controls since what I'm
> interested in is more the control of typographic distances than of
> durational distances. 
> 

Personally, I would be interested in co-sponsoring anything that meant
that using a 'ghost voice' for dynamics could be avoided.

f1\<2\>2

Is a lot easier to read (and type) than:


<< f1 { s4\< s4 s4\!\> s4\! } >>


One could probably use the Hairpin properties to give better control
over absolute position etc. E.g

\override Voice.Hairpin #'minimum-length = #5
\override Voice.Hairpin #'X-offset = #1.0
f1\<2
\once override Voice.Hairpin #'minimum-length = #3
\>2

Trevor - is this the kind of thing you mean by controlling typographic
distances?


Jamie

-- 
www.postlude.co.uk

test.ly
Description: Text document