Re: Beam positions and time signature spacing

[David Kastrup]

Janek Warchoł <address@hidden> writes:

> So, standards change.  If that's the case, we can be a forefront of
> such changes.

In the case of the measure numbers, this change causes less effective
use of a rectangular printing area.  In the age of digital print, the
role of a bounding box has changed.  I am not sure about the exact
consequences.  I consider it perfectly reasonable, however, to demand
controls for making the measure number stay inside of the general inking
area.  What we should have as a _default_ is a different question.

> PS if you could investigate spacing alists (this shouldn't be hard)
> and make a proposal of how exactly they should be changed,

Seems more related to the staff start spacings rather than the measure
numbers.

> that would be very good.  Discussions about concrete proposals *with*
> the code change are much different than discussions without the code.

It also sends out a more serious variant of the message "this is
important to me" without the accompanying "so this should make you want
to do the work".  It's in general much easier to get something done by
doing it than by telling others they should do it.

And sometimes you'll find that you can make them do most of the work
anyway by asking "how would I do this?" rather than "why don't you want
to do this?".

-- 
David Kastrup