On 2015/01/27 07:32:24, dak wrote:
Aaaand another thought: wouldn't it make more sense instead of having independent shifts for "with other articulations" and "without other articulations" when the articulation closest to the notehead is
responsible for
aligning the whole stack of articulations?
Not in the case of staccatos, however. Staccatos are ideally (according to Gould) centered on the stem when alone, and centered on the notehead when with others. I can't think of an example of a compound articulation where staccato is at the bottom.
Which would be the extreme case of a weighted average where
articulations
closest to the notehead count most towards alignment. But I suspect
that
looking at more than just the closest articulation would likely be
overkill and
not an actual improvement.
Yes, I think weighting different toward-stem-shift values is too much. After all, articulations ought to be vertically aligned, and if a user for some reason wants to shift a single member of the stack, the numbers they use ought to reflect exactly the position relative to notehead and stem. https://codereview.appspot.com/196260043/ _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
