And I agree that the tricks you are describing in this thread and others, Mats, should be added to the documentation.
Stephen
----- Original Message ----- From: "Mats Bengtsson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Stephen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Graham Percival" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "lily-devel" <lilypond-devel@gnu.org>
Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2005 4:36 AM
Subject: Re: Doc help: \markup{} vs \mark
Stephen wrote:\mark has evolved into a way to put text over a barline, but you cannot use \markup to put text over a barline, only over a note.
Wrong! \markup can be used more or less everywhere where you can use a text string, in order to get more freedom to change fonts, or typeset more or less whatever you want. For example, you can use \mark \markup{ \large "DS. al Fine" }
So, two completely different concepts are involved here:
- Text scripts versus rehearsal marks: A text script is typeset using c4-"string" or c4-\markup{...} and is placed above the specified note. "Rehearsal marks" on the other hand are typeset using \mark "string" or \mark \markup{...}. If you specify the \mark command at a bar line, the resulting mark is placed above the bar line, if you specify it in the middle of a bar, the resulting mark is positioned between notes. Finally, if it's specified before the first note if a score (or in general at the beginning of a score line), then it's placed before the first note of the line.
To summarize, use text scripts to place things above a note, use \mark to place things between notes, above bar lines or before the first note of a score line. Another main difference is that \mark is only typeset above the top stave of the score, whereas text scripts are typeset for each stave. So, this makes \mark useful for rehearsal marks, tempo indications, fermatas, Da capo, segnos, Fine and so on. A tricky detail about \mark is that if it appears at a line break, then it's typeset at the beginning of the next line instead of over the last bar line of the previous line unless you fiddle with the break-visibility. Of course, the default makes perfect sense as long as you use \mark for rehearsal marks.
- Simple text strings typeset using the default font versus text markups, i.e. "string" versus \markup{\italic \large string }.
/Mats
Stephen
----- Original Message ----- From: "Graham Percival" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "lily-devel" <lilypond-devel@gnu.org> Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2005 11:32 PM Subject: Doc help: \markup{} vs \mark
What's the actual difference between \markup and \mark?
Historically, \mark was used for rehearsal marks, and the docs reflect that. These days, however, \mark is used for things like fermatas on bar lines, "DS. al Fine" right-aligned at the end of a piece, etc.
Is the "definition" of a \mark simply that it is a grob that's placed shortly
before the next note, on a barline if possible ? experimentation
suggests that; is there anything more to know about \mark ?
\relative c'' { c4 \mark \default c2 \mark \default c4 \mark \default c1 \mark \default }
(Mats: I sent this to -devel instead of -user, so I'd appreciate your help. :)
Cheers, - Graham
_______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
_______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
--
=============================================
Mats Bengtsson
Signal Processing
Signals, Sensors and Systems
Royal Institute of Technology
SE-100 44 STOCKHOLM
Sweden
Phone: (+46) 8 790 8463 Fax: (+46) 8 790 7260
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW: http://www.s3.kth.se/~mabe
=============================================
_______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
