"Keith E OHara" <k-ohara5...@oco.net> writes:
> On Sun, 03 Oct 2010 03:12:38 -0700, bug-lilypond-request wrote:
>>
>> Check the first two systems on the second page of the following score:
>>\repeat unfold 80 { <c'''-1 e'''-3 g'''-5> c' <c,-1 e,-3 g,-5> c' }
>>Perhaps skylines should not be taken as literally as that, but padded
>> out somewhat.
>
> Do you mean padded out sideways, or vertically?
How about diagonally? In case of doubt, horizontally. The problem is
that if we have "toothed" skylines, opposing teeth might just fit into
one another like cog wheels. Padding sideways would, at one particular
threshold, completely unlock the teeth. A smoother transition from
locked to unlocked would appear to make sense, hence the suggestion to
pad "diagonally", where the sum of adjacent horizontal and vertical
distances should not fall below a given limit.
Another option would be Euclidian.
--
David Kastrup
_______________________________________________
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
