On 3 Mar 2005 at 8:44, Johannes Gebauer wrote: > David W. Fenton wrote: > > > I also think that staff optimization should not be something that > > you have to remove and then re-apply. If you insert new measures, or > > insert data in previously empty measures (or you clear/hide > > previously populated measures), if you've got optimization turned > > on, it should automatically cause the system to re-optimize. I think > > it's crazy that the optimization information is stored with the > > absolute system rather than as a global setting that automatically > > updates the optimization when conditions change to warrant it. > > Just for the record, I just had to optimize many parts out of the > score, which weren't empty at all. This was possible because the > optimization information is stored with the absolute system, and is in > fact manually accessable. I do not wish this to be changed, simply > because the way it works is ideal for the work I do.
What if it were an option to do it the old way, or what I consider the common sense way (as I described)? -- David W. Fenton http://www.bway.net/~dfenton David Fenton Associates http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [email protected] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
