Re: Implement make-bow-stencil, make-tie-stencil for use in markup-commands undertie and overtie (issue 270640043 by address@hidden)

[thomasmorley65]

On 2015/11/16 15:57:49, dak wrote:
> On 2015/11/14 21:25:11, thomasmorley651 wrote:
> > On 2015/11/13 21:51:19, dak wrote:
> > > Sorry for yet finding more stuff that, after all, could likely be
improved.
> > At
> > > least I did so pretty quickly this time.
> > >
> > >
> >

https://codereview.appspot.com/270640043/diff/60001/scm/define-markup-commands.scm
> > > File scm/define-markup-commands.scm (right):
> > >
> > >
> >

https://codereview.appspot.com/270640043/diff/60001/scm/define-markup-commands.scm#newcode623
> > > scm/define-markup-commands.scm:623: (direction DOWN)
> > > Should this markup command be called "undertie" or should it
rather be
> "tie",
> > > with "undertie" explicitly overriding `direction'?
> > >
> > > Because the rather explicit name '\undertie' seems a bit
inconsistent with
> the
> > > behavior of
> > >
> > > {
> > >   c'1^\markup \undertie hm
> > > }
> > >
> > > where the direction is determined by the direction specified for
the
> > TextScript.
> >
> > Changed property direction to text-direction, which is in use
already.

> Uh, that's for left/right direction changes.  I'd strongly recommend
against
> that.  If we are sure we'll never need to change the direction based
on the
> markup direction (like, say, over/under actual note glyphs?), I'd just
implement
> commands undertie/overtie that call some internal function with the
direction to
> use directly.

Done this way. Right now I can't imagine any use-case for relying on
direction-modifiers.
If there is use for it sometime in the future we may change this again,
ofcourse.


> If there may be a use case for inheriting direction, some directable
markup
> command may be useful.  Either it is called (with an appropriate
explicit
> direction override) by undertie/overtie, or all three call the same
internal
> function.



https://codereview.appspot.com/270640043/