On 2018/04/24 21:49:37, Carl wrote:
On 2018/04/24 18:43:45, Be-3 wrote:
> The intervals are just *approximating* the outlines of a run-of-the
mill
> natural glyph. I even played around with the concept using squared
paper.
> This approach more or less relies on the fact that the
square/parallelogram
> part of a natural glyph will be one stave-space high independent of
the font
> used, just like a notehead in *any* font will be one stave-space
high.
So it's a reasonable approximation that the box part of the natural
will extend
about 3/4 staff spaces above the staff position of the natural, and
the
descender will descend about 1.5 staff spaces below.
Seems like a reasonable estimate to me, even if it's not exact for a
particular
font. You can't get too far away from that and still fit in a staff.
Thanks,
Carl
Agreed, Carl, And, IMHO, there is no need for exaggerated exactness: as soon as two corners get too close (no matter how close exactly), we need a wee bit of extra padding. The main reason for the 3/4 staff spaces, to be honest, was that the two intervals will be just touching (with intersection length 0) for the corner-to-corner constellation. All the best, Torsten https://codereview.appspot.com/343020043/ _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
