[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: NR 4.1.4 ragged bottom and vertical spacing
From: |
Trevor Daniels |
Subject: |
Re: NR 4.1.4 ragged bottom and vertical spacing |
Date: |
Fri, 11 Dec 2015 14:18:58 -0000 |
Noeck wrote Friday, December 11, 2015 1:19 PM
> Hi Federico and Simon,
>
>>> %%%%%
>>> If a page has a ragged bottom, the resulting distance is the largest of:
>>>
>>> basic-distance,
>>> minimum-distance, and
>>> padding plus the smallest distance necessary to eliminate collisions
>>> %%%%%%
>>>
>>> Does it mean that it will take the largest value between those three?
>>
>> Yes.
>
> Depends on how you define largest value. Not in the sense of
> max(basic-distance, minimum-distance, padding)
> because they measure different distances from different points.
> I tried to illustrate it here:
> http://joramberger.de/files/LilypondSpacing.pdf
>
> So the final distance is the basic-distance (which can be stretched and
> shrunk), but not smaller than minimum-distance. Depending on the
> available space, it can more or less than basic-distance, but never
> smaller than minimum-distance. And in addition not so small, that
> objects from the upper staff are closer to objects from the lower staff
> than padding.
>
> In stead of the maximum of these properties it is more the maximum of
> derived quantities:
>
> max(basic * stretching factor, minimum, padding + extent of skylines)
>
> In particular the stretching factor is missing from the reasoning in the
> docs above.
I don't think this is correct. The quoted words begin, "If a page has a
ragged bottom ..." When that is the case there is no stretching, and
the straight quantities apply.
Trevor