Hello,
2013/8/1 Urs Liska
> I have brought this up before without success. But as my interest
> reappeared I'll try it again with a slightly more specific question.
>
there is an existing issue based on your request:
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=2542
Do you believe, it is
Am 01.08.2013 15:01, schrieb Urs Liska:
I could imagine declaring a specific lilypond layer as a pdf layer at the top
of the file and later look for elements of this layer.
That way I would be responsible myself and by default there wouldn't be any
matching inconcistencies.
Something like
#(se
Jan-Peter Voigt schrieb:
>Am 01.08.2013 11:07, schrieb Jan-Peter Voigt:
>> isn't the layer grob property what you want?
>no, it isn't ...
>but if one comes up with the right pdfmark ps command, there has to be
>a
>check of this layer property to avoid inconsistent lily- and
>pdf-layers.
>Be
Am 01.08.2013 11:07, schrieb Jan-Peter Voigt:
isn't the layer grob property what you want?
no, it isn't ...
but if one comes up with the right pdfmark ps command, there has to be a
check of this layer property to avoid inconsistent lily- and pdf-layers.
Best, Jan-Peter
__
Am 2013-08-01 um 15:25 schrieb David Kastrup :
> Mike Solomon writes:
>
>> As far as I know, the PS standard doesn't support any native form of
>> layering, and LilyPond pre-renders to PS before PDF.
>
> But it converts the PostScript to PDF using Ghostscript, and Ghostscript
> will both read
Mike Solomon writes:
> As far as I know, the PS standard doesn't support any native form of
> layering, and LilyPond pre-renders to PS before PDF.
But it converts the PostScript to PDF using Ghostscript, and Ghostscript
will both read and write PDF and PostScript, so it is quite likely that
ther
Hi Urs,
isn't the layer grob property what you want?
This is what I use to interrupt ties (or slurs) if they collide with a
time signature:
% to have the time sig behind the staff symbol
\override Staff.TimeSignature #'layer = #-5
% whiteout anything behind the time sig
\override Staff.TimeSign
On 1 août 2013, at 11:15, Urs Liska wrote:
> I have brought this up before without success. But as my interest reappeared
> I'll try it again with a slightly more specific question.
>
> When LilyPond finally renders its objects 'on paper' how complicated would it
> be to allow it to print on l
I have brought this up before without success. But as my interest
reappeared I'll try it again with a slightly more specific question.
When LilyPond finally renders its objects 'on paper' how complicated
would it be to allow it to print on layers that show up as separate
layers in the final pd
