Hi Harm, Thank you so much for doing all this! Very informative and helpful.
> I made some fundamental research about spanners with line-interface > and those with additional line-spanner-interface. > Code, pdf, log attached. Their behaviour is inconsistent, to say the least. =( > Regarding default OttavaBracket: > It doesn't have line-spanner-interface […] > It is discussable whether OttavaBracket should behave more like other > spanners with line-spanner-interface. I guess the main reason why > OttavaBracket is done as it is, was to have edge-height and > bracket-flare user-settable. > Though, this may be possible even if the stencil-procedure would > listen to the properties from line-spanner-interface. > > This would mean to rewrite the stencil, ofcourse. C++ work, which I > can't do myself. David K: Here, I believe, is a perfect example of a well-defined task that I would be happy to sponsor. It’s worth at least 50 Euro to me. - if it’s an easier fix than that, I’m happy for my money to go to whatever cause seems appropriate; - if it’s a harder fix than that, perhaps I can get some co-sponsors. Thoughts? > P.S.: Up to now I found it impossible to override certain properties > of the first part of a broken OttavaBracket, like the length of the line. > Hairpin has the 'broken-bound-padding at least, but none of the > others, if I'm not mistaken. And my limited testing with \alterBroken seems to suggest that not all bits are user-settable (e.g., I still can’t seem to set the broken text without overriding the stencil). Thanks, Kieren. ________________________________ Kieren MacMillan, composer ‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info ‣ email: i...@kierenmacmillan.info _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
