Mark Polesky <markpole...@gmail.com> writes: > Janek Warchoł wrote: >> So, we can say that \magnifyStaff sets staff "size" to an >> absolute value - defined as the fraction of the default >> size - and not "relative" to the previous size. > > Not exactly. A magnifyStaff value is only relative to the > previous staff size the first time it's used in a given > staff. The value of "1" refers to the settings that are in > effect when magnifyStaff is first called. After that, then > yes, I suppose it's "absolute". But it's not precise to say > that it scales the "default" values, since it scales the > user's settings.
Sigh. That's not as much a user interface as it is a nightmare. It's sort of hand-waving. > But do you really think this is what users are going to > want? To me the extra reset command seems needlessly > cumbersome, and the "relative" magnification seems so > non-intuitive, I find it hard to believe that anyone needs a > relative function here, so I just built the reset into the > function itself. And besides, isn't this already so > esoteric (multiple mid-stream staff size changes?), what > tiny minority are we catering to by even worrying about it? > > Sorry if I'm ranting; my questions are sincere, and I'm > happy to take further discussion on the matter. I think I'm > leaning towards: > 1) keeping magnifyStaff as it is > 2) making magnifyMusic syntax like magnifyStaff > 3) changing magnifyMusic to magnifyVoice The takeout may be that several commands doing a clear-defined job may be warranted. Personally, I am most uncomfortable with the "be relative to current settings once" idea: that seems like a total nightmare in situations using quotes or similar. The question is where we could access a reasonably "default" setting that relative references could be based on. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
