When you read the documentation for an interface, check the bottom of the
page for "This object supports the following interface(s):".  In this case
it's the grob-interface that has the extra-offset property.

--
Knute Snortum



On Sun, Dec 6, 2020 at 8:10 AM Richard Shann <[email protected]>
wrote:

> On Sun, 2020-12-06 at 16:52 +0100, Pierre Perol-Schneider wrote:
> > Hi Richard,
> > How about:
> >
> > \version "2.20.0"
> > A = {f2~  f8. s16 s4 }
> > B = {bes,2~
> >      \tweak Dots.extra-offset #'(-.8 . 0)
> >      bes,8. bes,32 a, bes,16 c d e }
> >
> > \score {
> > \new Staff  <<
> >  \new Voice   {\voiceOne \clef bass \A }
> >  \new Voice   {\voiceTwo \B }
> >             >>
> >        }
>
> Thank you! I'm disconcerted that I didn't find this for myself. I got
> to this page
> https://lilypond.org/doc/v2.18/Documentation/internals/dots
> but it didn't seem to lead to extra-offset as a property... I suppose I
> need to tweak LilyPond so rarely that I get out of practice at finding
> things in the documentation (this was my first bit of polyphony for ten
> years!).
>
> Richard
>
>
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Pierre
> >
> > Le dim. 6 déc. 2020 à 15:32, Richard Shann <[email protected]>
> > a écrit :
> > > I struck me that this score:
> > >
> > > 8><8><8><8><8><8><8><8><8><8><8><8><8><8><
> > > \version "2.20.0"
> > > A = {f2~  f8. s16 s4 }
> > > B = {bes,2~  bes,8. bes,32 a, bes,16 c d e }
> > >
> > > \score {
> > > \new Staff  <<
> > >  \new Voice   {\voiceOne \clef bass \A }
> > >  \new Voice  {\voiceTwo \B }
> > >             >>
> > >        }
> > > 8><8><8><8><8><8><8><8><8><8><8><8><8><8><
> > >
> > > has the lower dotted note vertically aligned with the upper one
> > > (see
> > > attached pdf). I thought it might be nicer to move the lower dot
> > > closer
> > > to its notehead, but I couldn't find out how to do that. With a lot
> > > of
> > > things there are properties to tweak but this didn't seem to the
> > > the
> > > case for augmentation dots.
> > > Perhaps someone could steer me in the right direction?
> > >
> > > Richard Shann
> > >
>
>

Reply via email to