Am 21.09.2016 um 19:29 schrieb Simon Albrecht:
>> suggestion) but apply it to the vertical center between the two
>> endpoints? That way the whole slur should somewhat shift together with
>> changed Y of an end point.
>> Would it be acceptable to have a pair? as an argument when the two
>> elements*do* refer to X and Y but with completely different behaviour?
>> Or should that then be separated to two individual properties?
> That sounds like way over the top. The user interface should be
> reasonably easy to understand, so I’d prefer a simple staff-space
> offset for Y. It seems like a good idea to do it relative to the
> vertical center between the two endpoints, then 0 as a default is
I'm not clear if we are all talking about the same things. Maybe write
it down explicitly:
#'((point . (.4 . 12)))
would now mean: "40 % through the horizontal space between the end
points and 12 staff spaces above the vertical center between the points.
This is completely easy to write down but surely confusing to learn,
even if documented properly.
#'((point-X-ratio . 0.4)
(point-Y . 12))
seems clearer but more verbose to write out.
lilypond-user mailing list