On 12/13/06, Luc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Sorry if I was not accurate in my report! Maybe this has to do with the
complexity of the topic. But I'll try to break down all the points:
1. {c'\ d'\sf}
Here I would expect both articulations to have the same vertical distance
either from the notehead or from the staffline. In the example above the
"sf" of the note "d" is lower than the "p" of the note "c".
LilyPond doesn't align dynamic texts; I'm pretty sure this isn't related to
the new vertical placement stuff. You can find more information in the
mailing list archives (although I don't remember which list).
2. { c'\p d'\sf e'\pp }
Adding a 3rd note with articulation the new strategy takes effect and the
"pp" is moved down to avoid colliding with the preceding "sf".
In order to get this to work as you described, I had to change \pp to \ppp
(and similarly for the following examples).
3. { c'\p d'\sf e'\pp f'\sf}
Adding a 4th note with an articulation I do not understand, why this
articulation has to be lowered again - there is plenty of space above and no
collision is to be expected there.
This is a situation where the algorithm isn't optimal. The workaround is to
do \once \override DynamicLineSpanner #'outside-staff-priority = #1 before
the final \sf. I'll work on this but I don't know how easy it is so it might
take a while.
Now coming to \fatText: As I remember from the documentation, the purpose of
\fatText is to assure that a long text can be written in its full length -
following musical events wil be pushed to the right until the text is done.
This obviously interferes with the new strategy!
4. { \fatText c'\p d'\sf e'\pp f'\sf}
This yields the same result as example 3.
If you look at the definition of fatText (in ly/property-init.ly), you'll
see it's just a shortcut for "\override TextScript #'no-spacing-rods = ##f".
That is, it only applies to TextScripts, not DynamicTexts! If you put
"\override DynamicText #'no-spacing-rods = ##f" instead of \fatText, you'll
get something closer to what you want. You won't get exactly what you want
because there is a bug in the vertical placement. But this will be fixed
very soon.
I hope that helps a bit. We are currently working on a new page for the
manual that will have more information on this feature and how to tweak it.
_______________________________________________
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
