On Sep 22, 2010, at 4:02 AM, SN jef chippewa wrote:
definition of 1 artic rather than 2. don't see how you can argue that that isn't great.
It would be great if you could control placement, but you can't. If you have a single definition that might place above or below the note, then you have just one pair of values for handle positioning. If you say yes to a flipped symbol (whether you actually use a different character or not), you can get a second pair, but it's keyed to above-vs-below which might not be what you want. (More likely if I want different positioning, it's noteside-vs-stemside.) Or something like staccato where if you like your stemside dots centered on the stem you need three pairs for sure. (I actually use all four, since my noteside above is just slightly different from my noteside below.)
There are probably some articulations where I could use a single definition and not mind the placement, but since so many of them require two, I just keep all articulations that way for consistency. I have a metatool scheme I'm used to.
If I had my way, every articulation definition would allow handle positioning numbers for each of four cases: upstem noteside, downstem noteside, upstem stemside, and downstem stemside. Then I would use a single definition for each, but without that I'm just too fussy and I'd end up nudging every stemside articulation.
Speaking of nudging, I'd also like each articulation definition to have an offset for when it's put over a whole note. I haven't broken down and made a separate fermata articulation for whole notes, but I probably should, since I'm always nudging them.
mdl _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
