[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: whole rests and clefs
From: |
Werner LEMBERG |
Subject: |
Re: whole rests and clefs |
Date: |
Fri, 20 Aug 2004 08:00:51 +0200 (CEST) |
> > Have a look in any full score: A changing clef right before a bar
> > line is not taken into account for computing the horizontal
> > position of a whole rest. It is only necessary to have a certain
> > horizontal minimum
>
> Is this also the case when all staves except one have a clef-change?
This is a quite artificial, isn't it? I'm not aware of a real
example. Let's say that if there are more staves with a clef change,
then the clef is taken into account for the rest position. (This is a
special variant of case 2 below.)
> In other words: is your point that
>
> - all multi-rests should be horizontally aligned
Yes -- you mean `vertically aligned' so that all rests in a bar have
the same horizontal position, right?
> or
>
> - multi-rests should be centered between barlines, instead of
> closest bar/clef/key-sig/etc.
No.
> I think it should be the first, and without conflicts (eg. for
> single staff music), they should be centered in the available space,
> taking clefs into account.
IMHO the whole rest should be centered over the horizontal interval
where notes can be typeset. This makes two cases:
1. The clef needs additional horizontal space:
| |
| o o o o clef|
| | | | | |
| ------- |
| |
| o |
| | |
| |
^ ^
Here the `C' clef must be taken into account.
2. The clef doesn't need additional horizontal space:
| |
| o o o o |
| | | | | |
| ------- |
| |
| o clef|
| | |
| |
^ ^
In this case, the clef should be ignored for the computation of
the whole rest's width.
I think that those rules should be applied to a single staff also:
| |
| o clef|
| | |
| |
^ ^
Werner