Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

2009/8/4 Joe Neeman : > The interaction between the different xxx-spacing variables is a little > complex and I need to document it properly. In this case, the problem is > that Lyrics are unaffected by between-staff-spacing (because they are > non-spaceable) and so your override only forces there

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

On Mon, 2009-08-03 at 12:22 -0600, Andrew Hawryluk wrote: > On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 7:18 PM, Joe Neeman wrote: > > After fixing the latest round of bugs (pointed out by Neil Puttock and > > Michael Käppler), I've pushed the changes to git's master branch. That > > is, you should test master instead

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 7:18 PM, Joe Neeman wrote: > After fixing the latest round of bugs (pointed out by Neil Puttock and > Michael Käppler), I've pushed the changes to git's master branch. That > is, you should test master instead of dev/jneeman and bugs now belong on > the bug list instead of i

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

After fixing the latest round of bugs (pointed out by Neil Puttock and Michael Käppler), I've pushed the changes to git's master branch. That is, you should test master instead of dev/jneeman and bugs now belong on the bug list instead of in this thread. Thanks for all the comments and testing, Jo

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

On Mon, 2009-07-27 at 23:36 +0100, Neil Puttock wrote: > Hi Joe, > > Here's an attachment with three examples for you to test. Hi Neil, Thanks for the test files. I think they're all fixed now. Note, however, that I've changed how alignment-distances works; its arguments now should be positive r

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

BTW, what is the best place to report bugs with the new code? I'm assuming that -bug is for mainstream code and problems with experimental versions should be discussed here. I think this thread is a good place. Joe Hi Joe, many thanks at first! Great work! I ran your new code on a se

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

On Mon, 2009-07-27 at 15:14 +, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote: > On Sun, Jul 26, 2009 at 9:54 PM, Graham > Percival wrote: > >>> (It's not that I'm afraid of building Lilypond, it's just that > >>> spending three days > >>> installing the prerequisites is currently low on my list of > >>> priorities.)

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

On Sun, 2009-07-26 at 14:54 -0700, Graham Percival wrote: > On Sun, Jul 26, 2009 at 04:24:03PM -0400, Kieren MacMillan wrote: > > Hello Joe (et al.), > > > >> (It's not that I'm afraid of building Lilypond, it's just that > >> spending three days > >> installing the prerequisites is currently low

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

On Sun, Jul 26, 2009 at 9:54 PM, Graham Percival wrote: >>> (It's not that I'm afraid of building Lilypond, it's just that >>> spending three days >>> installing the prerequisites is currently low on my list of >>> priorities.) >> >> I've spent about two days trying, and I'm still running into prob

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

On Sun, Jul 26, 2009 at 06:49:13AM -0400, Kieren MacMillan wrote: > Graham, > >> Oh, in case anybody was wondering: my father is pure native >> British, educated at Oxford, and considers the 1978 Fowler's >> Modern English second revised edition (printed in Oxford) to be >> the definitive guide to

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

On Sun, 2009-07-26 at 15:57 -0400, Dan Eble wrote: > On 26 Jul 2009, at 13:41, Joe Neeman wrote: > > > Please do send me the files. But first, check to see if they give the > > same behaviour with current git. I pushed some changes yesterday that > > may have helped. > > I have a book of 243 scor

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

In message <20090726092704.ga3...@nagi>, Graham Percival writes [1] the only thing that comes to mind at the moment is using the American "z" in words rather than the British "s". I just think that "-ize" looks cooler than "-ise". Actually, "s" is FRENCH, not English :-) Bearing in mind The

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

On Sun, Jul 26, 2009 at 04:24:03PM -0400, Kieren MacMillan wrote: > Hello Joe (et al.), > >> (It's not that I'm afraid of building Lilypond, it's just that >> spending three days >> installing the prerequisites is currently low on my list of >> priorities.) > > I've spent about two days trying,

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

Hello Joe (et al.), Are there development builds for download anywhere? +1 [OS X 10.4 Intel] (It's not that I'm afraid of building Lilypond, it's just that spending three days installing the prerequisites is currently low on my list of priorities.) I've spent about two days trying, and

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

On 26 Jul 2009, at 13:41, Joe Neeman wrote: Please do send me the files. But first, check to see if they give the same behaviour with current git. I pushed some changes yesterday that may have helped. I have a book of 243 scores that could use better vertical spacing. Are there development

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

On Sun, 2009-07-26 at 20:02 +0100, Neil Puttock wrote: > Hi Joe, > > 2009/7/26 Joe Neeman : > > > Please do send me the files. But first, check to see if they give the > > same behaviour with current git. I pushed some changes yesterday that > > may have helped. > > Have you carried these change

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

Hi Joe, 2009/7/26 Joe Neeman : > Please do send me the files. But first, check to see if they give the > same behaviour with current git. I pushed some changes yesterday that > may have helped. Have you carried these changes over from dev/jneeman? The reason I ask is that I'm now getting the sa

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

On Sun, 2009-07-26 at 21:46 +1000, Cameron Horsburgh wrote: > Joe Neeman writes: > > > On Fri, 2009-07-10 at 17:09 +0200, Reinhold Kainhofer wrote: > >> Am Montag, 22. Juni 2009 15:31:14 schrieb Joe Neeman: > >> > A quick update on the new vertical spacing: [...] > >> > Anything I've missed? > >>

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

Kieren MacMillan writes: > Hi David, > >> @nonfrenchspacing does _not_, I repeat _not_, cause a larger space to >> appear by _default_ at sentence endings. However, when TeX does line >> justification, it will (if necessary) stretch the space after sentence >> endings more than the interword spa

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

Hi David, Well, the TeX book says: Excellent reference — thanks! so there _is_ extra natural space for a space factor of 2000 and larger. Perhaps the best compromise, then, would be to set the space factor at 1999 — that way, the single-spacers (a.k.a. star-bellied Sneeches) would be

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

Joe Neeman writes: > On Fri, 2009-07-10 at 17:09 +0200, Reinhold Kainhofer wrote: >> Am Montag, 22. Juni 2009 15:31:14 schrieb Joe Neeman: >> > A quick update on the new vertical spacing: [...] >> > Anything I've missed? >> >> While the new vertical spacing looks great for full scores (one syste

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

At 02:27 on 26 Jul 2009, Graham Percival wrote: > [1] the only thing that comes to mind at the moment is using the > American "z" in words rather than the British "s". I just think > that "-ize" looks cooler than "-ise". Um, that's not actually American... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxford_spe

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

Hi David, @nonfrenchspacing does _not_, I repeat _not_, cause a larger space to appear by _default_ at sentence endings. However, when TeX does line justification, it will (if necessary) stretch the space after sentence endings more than the interword space when @nonfrenchspacing is being used.

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

Graham, Oh, in case anybody was wondering: my father is pure native British, educated at Oxford, and considers the 1978 Fowler's Modern English second revised edition (printed in Oxford) to be the definitive guide to English writing. There's no American influence here! So what does Fowler's (

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

Graham, I could ask him for references tomorrow if you want. Like most religious beliefs, your father's bible (whatever reference it may be) will never convince me that my bible (Robert Bringhurst's "The Elements of Typographic Style") is anything except mao's own truth. =) PPS like

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 07:28:33PM +0100, Anthony W. Youngman wrote: > In message <20090725.163011.184567355...@gnu.org>, Werner LEMBERG > writes >> Indeed, I just see that @frenchspacing is only used for French and >> Japanese (the latter only partially). It should be activated for all >> lang

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 08:20:45AM -0400, Kieren MacMillan wrote: > Hi Werner (et al,), > >> Please use two spaces after a full stop in documentation strings for >> consistence. > > Since this is incorrect typographical practice, and Lilypond prides > itself on beautiful typography, I'm surprise

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

"Anthony W. Youngman" writes: > In message <20090725.163011.184567355...@gnu.org>, Werner LEMBERG > writes >>Indeed, I just see that @frenchspacing is only used for French and >>Japanese (the latter only partially). It should be activated for all >>languages except, perhaps, English. Note that

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

Kieren MacMillan wrote Saturday, July 25, 2009 6:30 PM Thanks for the reference — for subsequent thread-followers, I also recommend Indeed, I just see that @frenchspacing is only used for French and Japanese (the latter only partially).

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

>> Then I nominate @frenchspacing (i.e., single-spaced sentences) be >> used for the English docs, consistent with the overwhelming >> majority of modern English typographic style guides and practice... >> Seconder? Opposed? Abstentions? > > Don't we want to be following the GNU Coding Standards?

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

>> Indeed, I just see that @frenchspacing is only used for French and >> Japanese (the latter only partially). It should be activated for all >> languages except, perhaps, English. Note that I don't care what you >> native speakers actually decide for English > > Excellent! Then I nominate @fre

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

Hi Carl (et al.), Two spaces after a full stop allows the emacs sentence detection code to work properly. @frenchspacing eliminates the extra space after the full stop at the end of the sentence. Then it's settled — excellent! Thanks, Kieren. __

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

Carl Sorensen wrote: > Two spaces after a full stop allows the emacs sentence detection code to > work properly. > > @frenchspacing eliminates the extra space after the full stop at the end of > the sentence. > > Aren't we glad we use typesetting software instead of WYSIWYG word > processors?

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

On 7/25/09 12:01 PM, "Mark Polesky" wrote: > > > Kieren MacMillan wrote: >> Excellent! >> Then I nominate @frenchspacing (i.e., single-spaced sentences) >> be used for the English docs, consistent with the overwhelming >> majority of modern English typographic style guides and >> practice...

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 11:01:44AM -0700, Mark Polesky wrote: > > Kieren MacMillan wrote: > > Excellent! > > Then I nominate @frenchspacing (i.e., single-spaced sentences) > > be used for the English docs, consistent with the overwhelming > > majority of modern English typographic style guides and

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

In message <20090725.163011.184567355...@gnu.org>, Werner LEMBERG writes Indeed, I just see that @frenchspacing is only used for French and Japanese (the latter only partially). It should be activated for all languages except, perhaps, English. Note that I don't care what you native speakers a

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

Kieren MacMillan wrote: > Excellent! > Then I nominate @frenchspacing (i.e., single-spaced sentences) > be used for the English docs, consistent with the overwhelming > majority of modern English typographic style guides and > practice... Seconder? Opposed? Abstentions? Seconder. http://www.chica

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 01:30:45PM -0400, Kieren MacMillan wrote: > > Excellent! > Then I nominate @frenchspacing (i.e., single-spaced sentences) be used > for the English docs, consistent with the overwhelming majority of modern > English typographic style guides and practice... > Seconder? Oppo

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

Hi Werner, To cite the texinfo info pages: Thanks for the reference — for subsequent thread-followers, I also recommend Indeed, I just see that @frenchspacing is only used for French and Japanese (the latter only partially). It shoul

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

> "The view at CMOS is that there is no reason for two spaces after a > period in published work." Ok, whatever :-) Look up references to TeX and LaTeX for more on this topic. > However, the PDF (e.g., the NR) *appears* to preserve double-space > sentence separations — where (e.g., some > specif

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

Hi Werner, It really depends. IIRC, the Chicaco manual of style recommended this. "The view at CMOS is that there is no reason for two spaces after a period in published work." Also see page 28 of Robert Bri

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

>> Please use two spaces after a full stop in documentation strings for >> consistence. > > Since this is incorrect typographical practice, It really depends. IIRC, the Chicaco manual of style recommended this. > and Lilypond prides itself on beautiful typography, I'm surprised > this is the s

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

Hi Werner (et al,), Please use two spaces after a full stop in documentation strings for consistence. Since this is incorrect typographical practice, and Lilypond prides itself on beautiful typography, I'm surprised this is the standard in the docs — why/how was this decision made? Chee

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

> I've uploaded the patch for review at > http://codereview.appspot.com/97119 Since I don't understand the code at all, I've only a minor comment: Please use two spaces after a full stop in documentation strings for consistence. Thanks for your hard work! Werner _

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

I've uploaded the patch for review at http://codereview.appspot.com/97119 It's pretty huge, but many of the changes are just due to changes in the properties that control vertical spacing. Also, annotate-spacing is broken, but the fixes for that should be confined to scm/page.scm. Joe ___

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

On Fri, 2009-07-10 at 17:09 +0200, Reinhold Kainhofer wrote: > Am Montag, 22. Juni 2009 15:31:14 schrieb Joe Neeman: > > A quick update on the new vertical spacing: [...] > > Anything I've missed? > > While the new vertical spacing looks great for full scores (one system per > page), I have now r

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

On Fri, 2009-07-10 at 19:21 -0600, Andrew Hawryluk wrote: > On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 9:09 AM, Reinhold > Kainhofer wrote: > > Am Montag, 22. Juni 2009 15:31:14 schrieb Joe Neeman: > >> A quick update on the new vertical spacing: [...] > >> Anything I've missed? > > > > While the new vertical spacing

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 9:09 AM, Reinhold Kainhofer wrote: > Am Montag, 22. Juni 2009 15:31:14 schrieb Joe Neeman: >> A quick update on the new vertical spacing: [...] >> Anything I've missed? > > While the new vertical spacing looks great for full scores (one system per > page), I have now run int

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

On 10.07.2009, at 18:18, Reinhold Kainhofer wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Am Freitag, 10. Juli 2009 17:23:50 schrieb Trevor Daniels: Reinhold Please note that if you sign your messages in this way people using default Windows mail systems can't read them easily, and wi

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Am Freitag, 10. Juli 2009 17:23:50 schrieb Trevor Daniels: > Reinhold > > Please note that if you sign your messages in > this way people using default Windows mail systems > can't read them easily, and will most probably > just ignore them. Ah, sorry

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

er on the LilyPond lists seem to think it necessary to identify their authorship in this way. Trevor - Original Message - From: "Reinhold Kainhofer" To: "LilyPond Development" Cc: "Joe Neeman" Sent: Friday, July 10, 2009 4:09 PM Subject:

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

Am Montag, 22. Juni 2009 15:31:14 schrieb Joe Neeman: > A quick update on the new vertical spacing: [...] > Anything I've missed? While the new vertical spacing looks great for full scores (one system per page), I have now run into a case where the old system worked much better. In particular, t

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

>> Thanks, these are both fixed now. I've configured PianoStaff to >> stretch by default, but by a smaller amount than the other staff >> groups. At this point, though, all of the default settings are >> provisional (ie. if someone would try out different values and >> choose something that looks

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

2009/6/30 Joe Neeman : > Thanks, these are both fixed now. I've configured PianoStaff to stretch > by default, but by a smaller amount than the other staff groups. At this > point, though, all of the default settings are provisional (ie. if > someone would try out different values and choose someth

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

On Mon, 2009-06-29 at 13:48 +0200, Reinhold Kainhofer wrote: > Am Montag, 22. Juni 2009 15:31:14 schrieb Joe Neeman: > > A quick update on the new vertical spacing: the version now in dev/jneeman > > has most of the features that I had planned > > Wow, I just tried it out for the first time, and

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

Am Montag, 22. Juni 2009 15:31:14 schrieb Joe Neeman: > A quick update on the new vertical spacing: the version now in dev/jneeman > has most of the features that I had planned Wow, I just tried it out for the first time, and I must say I'm impressed, Finally the scores look like professional fu

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

A quick update on the new vertical spacing: the version now in dev/jneeman has most of the features that I had planned (although there are still lots of loose ends to tie up). In particular, you can - space staves in groups using \override StaffGroup.StaffGrouper #'after-last-staff-spacing = #'((s

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 6:46 PM, Kieren MacMillan < kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca> wrote: > Hi Joe, > > What I would *really* love are high-level commands to set intra-piece > (section) system-count and page-count options. > For example, I'd like to say that in an ABA form piece, the B section mus

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

2009/6/18 Andrew Hawryluk : > Could there be a property that specifies whether the non-spaceable are to be > a) centered bewteen the neighboring lines, > b) positioned as close to the upper line as possible, or > c) positioned as close to the lower line as possible? > > This would cover (a) piano-c

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 3:52 AM, Joe Neeman wrote: > On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 9:05 PM, Reinhold Kainhofer > wrote: >> >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> Am Montag, 15. Juni 2009 17:25:54 schrieb Joe Neeman: >> > I've started working on a new system for doing vertical layout i

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

Hi Joe, What I would *really* love are high-level commands to set intra-piece (section) system-count and page-count options. For example, I'd like to say that in an ABA form piece, the B section must be on two pages (whereas the leading A and trailing A' sections can be "auto-flowed" by Lil

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 2:50 PM, Reinhold Kainhofer wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Am Dienstag, 16. Juni 2009 11:52:09 schrieb Joe Neeman: > > On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 9:05 PM, Reinhold Kainhofer > > > This will certainly the possible in the layout code, but I don't se

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Am Dienstag, 16. Juni 2009 11:52:09 schrieb Joe Neeman: > On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 9:05 PM, Reinhold Kainhofer > > - -) Being able to set stretching factors on a StaffGroup-level. In > > particular, > > for full scores there are staff groups for woodwin

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 9:05 PM, Reinhold Kainhofer wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Am Montag, 15. Juni 2009 17:25:54 schrieb Joe Neeman: > > I've started working on a new system for doing vertical layout in one > pass > > (ie. positioning and stretching the systems si