Re: Sponsored feature request--cross-staff chords, ties

[Han-Wen Nienhuys]

Trevor Bača wrote:
> > > Well, if Steve or Vivian or Hans or somebody is willing to help out,
> > > then I'm willing to pitch in on the sponsoring too.
> > >
> > > I'm about to have cross-staff stuff all over some piano music and also
> > > between different *string* staves as well. So a question.
> > >
> > > QUESTION: will the proposed cross-staff implementation path enable
> > > cross-staff stemming and beaming between *nonadjacent* staves (eg, 1st
> > > violins and basses, passing over the 2nd violins, violas and cellos)?
> >
> > This is fraught with cyclic dependencies. It might be possible, but you
> > have to have some restrictions, eg.
> >
> >   * the distances between these staves have been fixed in advance.
>
> Fixed staff distance is perfectly good for me because of my way of
> working. In every score the first thing I do is turn on proportional
> notation to regularize horizontal spacing regular and the second thing
> is to fix staff distances to do the same thing for vertical spacing.
>
> So would that particular restriction (ie, that you only get
> "nonadjacent stemming" or "nonadjacent beaming" or whatever we wind up
> calling this sorta thing with fixed staff distances) cause a problem
> for anyone else?

I think it should work. Note that if you have x-staff beams with voices 
jumping non-adjacently, the beam in between may be painted over the 
skipped staff.

> 1. We already have the restriction with cross-staff beams in a
> PianoStaff so the restriction already exists in (at least part of) the
> model (and nobody seems to complain)

people do complain occasionally, because it's harder to get an efficient 
layout with the fixed distance.

--

Han-Wen Nienhuys - address@hidden - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen

LilyPond Software Design
 -- Code for Music Notation
http://www.lilypond-design.com