Hi David, Thanks for your answer. However, I probably badly explained my problem since it has nothing to do with any modern style alignment. Thing is that -- *in situ* -- every measure that begins with an accidental sign offsets the first note, except for this particular measure. Why? There is much room for that offset... (See measure 15 *in situ*)
Le jeu. 3 oct. 2019 à 16:56, David Wright <[email protected]> a écrit : > On Thu 03 Oct 2019 at 14:15:56 (+0200), Pierre Perol-Schneider wrote: > > Please consider these two staves: > > %%% > [ … 26ll snipped … ] > > fis es' c' d' fis } > > \repeat percent 2 { > > aes,! > > -\tweak extra-offset #'(-2.05 . 3.5) > > _\markup\with-color #red { > > \with-dimensions-from \null > > \override #'(on . 0.3)\override #'(off . 0.1)\override > #'(thickness . > > 2) > > \concat { > > \draw-dashed-line #'(0 . -5) > > \hspace #.7 > > \draw-dashed-line #'(0 . -5) > > } > > } > > fis es' c' d' fis > [ … ] > > > I find the last measure natural sign on Staff #2 optically misplaced (see > > line #52 what I was expecting for). > > 1) Is it a -- known? -- bug? > > 2) If not, would you consider this alignment as traditionally correct? > > I progressively lowered your aes,! above to ges,! and then f,! at > which point the natural moved to the left, just like the measure below > it in the second stave. Isn't this merely because the top of the > natural sign is now clear of the bottom of the barline, so there's > room to print it further left. > > (As an aside, it amuses me to read the posts from people who want their > scores' x-axes treated precisely like graph paper, with strict > proportional spacing. Surely this means that the first note of each > measure should overprint the barline.) > > Cheers, > David. >
_______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
