|
From: | David Nalesnik |
Subject: | Re: staccato dots and slurs in second voice |
Date: | Sun, 25 Jan 2015 20:51:32 -0600 |
Hi Jay,On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 7:03 PM, Jay Anderson <address@hidden> wrote:On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 5:14 PM, David Nalesnik
<address@hidden> wrote:
> It's definitely possible! Using a pointer to a ScriptColumn, the X-offset
> callback for Script can be modified to (1) center staccatos over the stem if
> no other articulations are present; (2) center them over the note head if
> multiple articulations are present. I'll go over this some more, and if all
> goes well I should have a patch up for discussion.
From another recent message:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2015-01/msg00509.html.
Is toward-stem-shift not the right thing to change instead of
X-offset?
That's effectively what I'm doing. I'm changing the X-offset callback because it's only there that the property toward-stem-shift is read (see scm/output-lib.scm). The trick is allowing two different concurrent values for toward-stem-shift: 1.0 for when the staccato is alone, 0.0 when other articulations are present (like a portato) In my experiment, I simply did what the engraver does regarding toward-stem-shift.Maybe there ought to be another property, held by staccato and staccatissimo--something that locks staccatos in tandem with any other articulations present. By default, the staccato and anything else would be linked. Who knows, someone might want to fool with toward-stem-shift of the staccato in a column, and I'm not wild about the sleight-of-hand I described above.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |