Re: names of vertical spacing dimensions

[Carl Sorensen]

On 10/9/10 9:46 AM, "Mark Polesky" <address@hidden> wrote:

> * * * * * * * * * *
> 
> "before-title-spacing" applies to these cases:
> 1) from last system in a score to top-level markup.
> 2) from last system of one score to scoreTitleMarkup of
>    another score.
> 
> Within the proposed naming scheme, the 2 choices for
> before-title-spacing are:
>   system-markup-spacing
>   score-markup-spacing
> 
> Carl likes "score-markup-spacing" for at least 2 reasons:
> 1) the upper attachment point is always the end of a score.
> 2) "system-markup" suggests that it should work within a
>    single score, and it doesn't.
> 
> I've gone back and forth, but now I'm in favor of
> "system-markup-spacing" for the following reasons:
> 1) it complements "markup-system-spacing" which is easier
>    to remember.

I don't agree with this rationale.  markup-system-spacing is chosen
because the markup can be either inside the score of which the system
is a part, or outside the score.  Hence we need to have it be markup-system.

In contrast, the markup to which we are spacing with score-markup-spacing is
always *outside* the score to which we are referring.  Thus, we can (and IMO
should) use score-* rather than system-*.

I think the asymmetry of these two situations calls for asymmetry in the
naming, rather than symmetry in the naming with the documentation making the
asymmetry clear.

But I won't be an obstructionist here.  I've made my argument, and am
willing to accept whatever decisions are made on the list.  And as the
person who is doing the work, Mark's opinions should carry more weight than
mine.

Thanks,

Carl