Re: Issue 38 in lilypond: collision fingering beam

[Trevor Daniels]

I've added a snippet based on the example supplied by Mark
to the repository in a form which is suitable for inclusion
in the selected snippets section of NR 1.7 Editorial annotations.
It will appear in the docs in due course.

See Avoiding collisions of chord fingering with beams

Thanks Mark

Trevor

> > Comment #2 by n.puttock:
> > This is invalid.
>
> i don't really understand what is invalid - there is a collision, it is 
> not
> readable and it is not what we are used from liylpond!!!
>
> > Stems are deliberately excluded from the supports of fingerings inside
> > chords unless
> > 'add-stem-support = ##t.
>
> i searched the manuals for an example how to use this option and found it
> with the snippets repository search which pointed to version 2.10.12:
>
> User backend properties
> add-stem-support (boolean)
>  If set, the Stem object is included in this script's support
>
> and
>
> text-script-interface
>
> An object that is put above or below a note
> User settable properties:
> add-stem-support (boolean)
>  If set, the Stem object is included in this script's support
>
> so i would like to illustrate it and hope it will also be mentioned in the
> actual docs one day:
>
> \relative {
>  \set fingeringOrientations = #'(up)
>  \set stringNumberOrientations = #'(up)
>  \set strokeFingerOrientations = #'(up)
>  r 16 [ r
>  < f c'^5 > 16
>  \override Fingering #'add-stem-support = ##t
>  < f c'^5 >
>
>  < f c' \5 >
>  \override StringNumber #'add-stem-support = ##t
>  < f c' \5 >
>
>  < f c'-\rightHandFinger #2 >
>  \override StrokeFinger #'add-stem-support = ##t
>  < f c' -\rightHandFinger #2 >]
>  }
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: 
> http://www.nabble.com/Issue-38-in-lilypond%3A-collision-fingering-beam-tp20389835p20531266.html
> Sent from the Gnu - Lilypond - Bugs mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2008 19:02:24 -0800 (PST)
> From: Mark Polesky <address@hidden>
> Subject: MetronomeMark doesn't respond to #'font-series override
> To: bug-lilypond <address@hidden>
> Message-ID: <address@hidden>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Developers,
>
> Is this a bug?
>
> - Mark
>
> _________________________________________________________
>
>
> %% MetronomeMark doesn't respond to #'font-series override
>
> \version "2.11.63-1"
>
> \score {
>  \new Staff \relative {
>    \tempo "Allegro"
>    g' a b c
>  }
>  \layout {
>    \context {
>      \Score
>
>      %% these 3 lines affect tempo mark as expected:
>      \override MetronomeMark #'font-family = #'sans
>      \override MetronomeMark #'font-size = #2
>      \override MetronomeMark #'font-shape = #'italic
>
>      %% but tempo remains bold despite adding this line:
>      \override MetronomeMark #'font-series = #'medium
>    }
>  }
> }
>
>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: font-series-bug.png
> Type: image/png
> Size: 3086 bytes
> Desc: not available
> Url : 
> http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/bug-lilypond/attachments/20081116/b9a7a9f1/font-series-bug.png
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2008 19:05:42 -0800
> From: address@hidden
> Subject: Issue 347 in lilypond: ragged-last-bottom=##f fails if
> ragged-bottom=##t
> To: address@hidden
> Message-ID: <address@hidden>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed; delsp=yes
>
> Issue 347: ragged-last-bottom=##f fails if ragged-bottom=##t
> http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=347
>
> Comment #4 by joeneeman:
> Ragged is currently used in 2 ways: to determine the page breaking (what
> looks good
> normally might look bad with ragged spacing) and for actually laying out
> the systems.
> What if we put in some functionality to separate these uses and allowed
> better tuning
> for the part that doesn't affect page breaking? This is much nicer because
> things are
> tricky if we want to enhance the page-breaking effects of ragged.
>
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are listed in the owner
> or CC fields of this issue, or because you starred this issue.
> You may adjust your issue notification preferences at:
> http://code.google.com/hosting/settings
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2008 22:09:49 -0800
> From: address@hidden
> Subject: Issue 347 in lilypond: ragged-last-bottom=##f fails if
> ragged-bottom=##t
> To: address@hidden
> Message-ID: <address@hidden>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed; delsp=yes
>
> Issue 347: ragged-last-bottom=##f fails if ragged-bottom=##t
> http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=347
>
> Comment #5 by lemzwerg:
> Can you give an example where `ragged page breaking' gives a different
> appearance?  I
> can't imagine a situation where page breaking depends on raggedness and 
> not
> on the
> available vertical (stretchable?) space.
>
>
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are listed in the owner
> or CC fields of this issue, or because you starred this issue.
> You may adjust your issue notification preferences at:
> http://code.google.com/hosting/settings
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> bug-lilypond mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
>
>
> End of bug-lilypond Digest, Vol 72, Issue 22
> ********************************************