Hi David, 2011/12/9 David Nalesnik <david.nales...@gmail.com>: > Hi Harm, > > I've taken a look at your calculations and I think I've found a more > straightforward way to determine the offsets for each of the elements. > Rather than centering each element first, then moving it with an additional > offset as you do, why not simply move everything from its _original_ > position by the same amount you move the note column? That way the > relationships are preserved, and you don't have to "reinvent the wheel" to > arrive at the right configuration of note-heads, dots, and accidentals > again.
this is great !! And I was not a little but a big blockhead.;) > The results look fine to me, except for the arpeggio of course. I don't > know what the problem is here. The arpeggio seems to belong to the NoteColumn (with "2.15.x"), although the IR speaks only about Stems and NoteHeads . This means that a chord with an arpeggio has a bigger extent (and length) and is selected when passing the condition of dir-correction as being greater than one-note-head-length. It's of course possible to change the condition, but I'm not sure, perhaps it's a bug. Did you notice http://old.nabble.com/bug-or-feature-with-the-extent-of-NoteColumn-with-%222.15.20%22---td32935365.html where I ask about it (so far without answer)? Many, many thanks!! Harm > > HTH, > David _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
