On 26/12/09 20:46, David Kastrup wrote:
In a similar vein, having a chord of dotted notes across voices, with a second in one voice, results in the dot in the other voice asking for a divorce. Though in this case I don't know what the convention for engraving is. The example I have in a 19th century score (Mertz's transcription of Schuberts Ständchen for guitar) corresponds to the 2nd chord in the example below, where the dot has been moved back to where it would normally be with a single note.Nick Payne<[email protected]> writes:See below. When I shift the first note in voiceTwo to avoid a collision with the note in voiceFour, the dot on the rest that begins voiceOne gets separated from the rest and pretty much disappears under the following accidental. It looks to me as though Lilypond is trying to keep the dots for the rest in voiceOne and the A in voiceFour vertically aligned, regardless of whether the rest and the A are vertically aligned. You can see this quite clearly by setting the hshift value to something larger such as #2.I guess that this sort of thing needs some accounting and/or linear programming in order to arrive at a good solution. You go down the note column and put all "natural" dot columns in one list. Then you assign the best columns overall. Opening a new column in the total is expensive (but less so if the vertical distance to the last column is large), displacing a dot from its note costs corresponding to the displacement, least total cost is taken. Something like that.
\version "2.13.9"
\relative c'' {
\new Staff
<<
\new Voice { \voiceOne <e d>4. <e d>4. }
\new Voice { \voiceTwo e,4. \once \override Dots #'extra-offset =
#'(-1 . 0) e4. }
>> }
<<attachment: test.preview.png>>
_______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
