Le mardi 14 février 2023 à 15:02 +0100, Valentin Petzel a écrit : > But \column does have exactly that issue. Column will hickup on "lines" > spanning multiple lines.
Precisely. That's why it should receive the lines individually rather
than already combined in a stencil.
```
\version "2.24.0"
\markup \column {
"Meter change."
"Chord stem."
"Bar line."
\justify { Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Ut eget
ante venenatis mi consectetur ornare. Cras facilisis dictum venenatis. }
"Key change."
}
```
vs.
```
\version "2.24.0"
\markup \column {
"Meter change."
"Chord stem."
"Bar line."
\justified-lines { Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit.
Ut eget
ante venenatis mi consectetur ornare. Cras facilisis dictum venenatis. }
"Key change."
}
```
> Another alternative though:
>
> A stencil could have optional spacing extents. E.g. when you do a text
> stencil
> it will have it’s regular stencil extents, but also also a spacing extent
> from
> base line to top line (which might be smaller or larger than the stencil
> extent). A stencil that does not have such extents can safely fall back to
> the
> stencil extents.
>
> All basic stencil operations could then be applied to this just as they apply
>
> to extents. But this would then allow us to stack stencil by this spacing
> extent rather than by the drawn extent.
Exactly what I said with
> The real fix would be changing the Stencil class to include an additional
> data member that would be the extent from the baseline of the first line of
> text to the baseline of the last line of text. Expect a lot of work though:
> all stencil operations would have to be modified to account for it.
"All stencil operations" may be an exaggeration: *most* of them wouldn't need
to care, but things like translating and combining would.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
