On Mar 5, 2011, at 10:43 AM, Neil Puttock wrote: > On 5 March 2011 14:38, Mike Solomon <mike...@ufl.edu> wrote: > >> Done - thanks for bearing with me as I learn about break-visibility. It is >> a corner of the code that I never had to deal with directly, so I'm still >> getting my sea legs. > > I suggest you remove the fallback value from > inherit-x-parent-visibility (or if you prefer, add another callback > for y-parent visibility without a default) otherwise grobs which don't > care about break-visibility (such as noteheads) will lose their > footnotes. > >> If you feel this is too hackish, I could make this direction-only (LEFT, >> CENTER, RIGHT) with CENTER defaulting to LEFT and have the footnote only >> apply to the first and last spanner. But, for long spanners, this seems >> less than ideal. As always, your suggestions are welcome! > > I'm afraid I'm at a loss to suggest anything better, so I'll have to > put up with it (unless anybody else can think of a better way.
The first half has been pushed with everything changed save this one caveat that you bring up. If after a week people have better suggestions after having played around with these footnotes, I'll incorporate that into push 2/2. Cheers, MS _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
