Re: Beam positions and time signature spacing

[Gilberto Agostinho]

Peter Bjuhr wrote
> Based on these two examples, it would indeed seem that LilyPond is 
> intelligent enough to adjust for this potential problem; in the first 
> example where there were no risk of mistakenly take the accidental for a 
> part of the key signature the distance were 1.3 and here when the risk 
> is apparent it is 1.5. If this is the case and not just random 
> coincidence I would completely drop this from the list of potential 
> problems. What do you think Gilberto?

It seems to be random to me. Have a look at these:

\version "2.17.95"
{
  \override Score.TimeSignature.stencil = ##f
 \key f \major
 aes'4
}
{
  \override Score.TimeSignature.stencil = ##f
 \key bes \major
 aes'4
}

In the first case, there is no risk of mistaken the flat accidental on the
aes for a key signature, but on the bottom case it has the risk. And both
have pretty much the same spacing (around 1.4 units). So I don't think
LilyPond is adjusting for potential misunderstandings.

Best,
Gilberto



--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Beam-positions-and-time-signature-spacing-tp153538p153764.html
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.