Re: Thriple flat/sharp glyphs...

[Abraham Lee]

Hi, Torsten!

On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 4:34 PM, Torsten Hämmerle <address@hidden> wrote:

Werner LEMBERG wrote
> In this proofsheet the spacing for smaller sizes is not `natural'.
> For example, the distance between the clef and the accidentals for
> `feta11' is very large.  Is this intentional?  I think it's a bit
> confusing.

Hmmm, I was wondering, too.
I just used \score inside a custom markup-command and set the size by
\layout { #(layout-set-staff-size design_size) }

It looks as if #(layout-set-staff-size) doesn't scale down all the
distances.
The key signatures all start at the same positions, independent of the stave
size...

The funny thing is that the "Notation" document claims
Known issues and warnings: "layout-set-staff-size does not change the
distance between the staff lines."

As far as I can see it at the moment, the distance between staff lines seems
to be one of the few distances it does change.

Well, that's a brilliant opportunity for checking out the brand-new
\magnifyStaff functionality - e voilà !

*Next attempt:*
issue3356-proofsheet.pdf
<http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/file/t3887/issue3356-proofsheet.pdf>
Now, the spacing looks much (!) better.

Thanks so much for heading this on! This is really exciting. I do feel like the slash on accidentals.flatflat.slash gets WAY too thick, comparatively, from really feta-18 and smaller. Maybe I just need to see it in context to change my mind. Also, since you brought up the typographic side of the design, I feel like the double and triple flat symbols should gradually become uncondensed as the point size decreases, starting from maybe feta-16, because the counter (the white space inside the flat) almost fills up all the way, not to mention when it's sitting on a staff line. Keeping the full width at that point gives the counter a little more breathing room. This is very common for optically sized designs: at smaller caption sizes, the shapes become more heavier and more "extended", at larger display sizes, the shapes become lighter and more condensed. I think that would really bring out the legibility at the smaller point sizes.

My two cents on the matter,

Abraham