On 2010/08/18 21:46:02, Neil Puttock wrote:
On 2010/08/15 04:10:36, Carl wrote:
> I tested, and verified that I don't need it, but why? I thought
that we had
> checks to issue a warning if an undefined property was used. Is
that only for
> context properties?
It depends on whether you think users are likely to do this (where
you'd also
have to `graphical' to an interface),
\override TextScript #'graphical = ##t
\override TextScript #'text = \markup \woodwind-diagram ...
I don't think the override of #'text is necessary; \markup creates
TextScript grobs, IIUC.
I deliberately want to be able to override the TextScript property,
because I want to
be able to set the display properties for all of the diagrams in a
piece (or perhaps in
a particular context), rather than having to set them diagram by
diagram.
So I might want to do something like:
diagram = \markup \woodwind-diagram #'oboe #'((lh . (d ees))
(cc . (five3qT1q))
(rh . (gis)))
<<
\new Staff {
\override Staff.TextScript #'size = #1.5
c''^\diagram
}
\new Staff {
c''_\diagram
}
This was the original intent of moving size, thickness, and graphical
from the argument
list to the property list.
So I guess I will need to go back and add graphical as a property, as
well as adding it to
an interface.
Thanks,
Carl
rather than this:
\markup \override #'(graphical . #t) \woodwind-diagram ...
There's no type-checking for markup props, but you can sneakily use
them in grob
overrides so they leak into markup, even if LilyPond protests.
Cheers,
Neil
http://codereview.appspot.com/1946043/
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
