Re: Double-underline markup

[Aaron Hill]

On 2019-10-19 4:51 am, Thomas Morley wrote:
> Am Sa., 19. Okt. 2019 um 13:35 Uhr schrieb David Kastrup <address@hidden>:
> > Thomas Morley <address@hidden> writes:
>
> > > Iiuc, you recommend to fix \underline to make it work with most simple
> > > input like:
> > >
> > > \markup {
> > >   \override #'(offset . 12) \underline
> > >   \override #'(offset . 10) \underline
> > >   \override #'(offset . 8) \underline
> > >   \override #'(offset . 6) \underline
> > >   \override #'(offset . 4) \underline
> > >   "underlined"
> > > }
> > >
> > > I'll have a look.
> >
> > No, to have it work with most simple input like
> >
> > \markup
> >   \underline
> >   \underline
> >   \underline
> >   \underline
> >   \underline
> >   "underlined"
>
> Ok, understood. I'll give it a try...

Something to consider is how multiple \underlines would ideally stack.

%%%%
\version "2.19.83"

\markup \column {
  \line { \italic "Inner-most, bottom-most:" }
  \line { Lorem \override #'(offset . 3) \underline \line {
    ipsum \override #'(offset . 6) \underline dolor sit } amet }
  \line { \italic "Inner-most, top-most:" }
  \line { Lorem \override #'(offset . 6) \underline \line {
    ipsum \override #'(offset . 3) \underline dolor sit } amet }
}
%%%%

I could see potential rationale for either approach depending on what 
the underlining is trying to convey.  As such, would it make more sense 
to simply try to solve the problem of \underlines growing horizontally 
and leave the vertical positioning to be explicitly specified by the 
user?

On a related note, though, some folks might *want* nested \underlines to 
expand (or shrink) horizontally:

%%%%
\version "2.19.83"

\markup {
  \pad-x #1
  \override #'(offset . 9) \underline \pad-x #-0.5
  \override #'(offset . 6) \underline \pad-x #-0.5
  \override #'(offset . 3) \underline Triple
}
%%%%


-- Aaron Hill

multi-underline.cropped.png
Description: PNG image

triple-underline.cropped.png
Description: PNG image