\raise in markup glitch (was: Re: Pre-Release: Slave Songs of the United States)

[Marcus Brinkmann]

At Tue, 12 Jun 2007 10:42:54 +0200,
"Dominic Neumann" <address@hidden> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> in song No. 27 the markup text "Variation second." is placed too low,
> so it´s directly printed onto the notes.

Thanks.  My work around apparently stopped working.  The problem is
that this does not work:

d'16^\markup { \raise #1 \italic { Variation second. } }

and this doesn't work either (that's in the 1.0 ALPHA):

d'16^\markup { "" \raise #1 \italic { Variation second. } }

I changed it now to the following, which works:

d'16^\markup { " " \raise #1 \italic { Variation second. } }

There must be a better way to do this, though.
 
> And why are there bar numbers on some systems and on others not. For
> example, in song 39 only system two and four are printed WITH bar
> numbers, the others not. In other songs (e.g. No. 41) every system
> (except the first) has bar numbers. Why?

This happens when a bar is split across a line break.  I do this
fairly often, sometimes because that's also what the original book
has, see for example: http://docsouth.unc.edu/church/allen/ss3.jpg,
and sometimes because it makes for much better line breaks overall, at
least to my taste.

Is splitting bars across line breaks at the beginning of verses
considered bad style?  In singing practice it may be a problem
realizing that there is a split, although it seems to me that if a
song starts with a partial, it's clear that verses should start with a
partial as well.

I fixed the bar numbering in 040 though, where Lilypond's bar counter
seems to get quite confused.  There may be more problems like that,
I'll make myself a note to review the bar numbering of the songs.
Thanks for pointing it out!

Marcus