[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Spacing issue after Mark and TextScript
From: |
David Sumbler |
Subject: |
Re: Spacing issue after Mark and TextScript |
Date: |
Sun, 25 Nov 2018 12:30:03 +0000 |
-----Original Message-----
From: Thomas Morley <address@hidden>
To: David Sumbler <address@hidden>
CC: address@hidden, lilypond-user <address@hidden>
Subject: Re: Spacing issue after Mark and TextScript
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2018 22:28:06 +0100
Am Fr., 23. Nov. 2018 um 15:28 Uhr schrieb David Sumbler <
address@hidden>:
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Sumbler <address@hidden>
> Reply
> -To: address@hidden
> To: address@hidden
> Subject: Spacing issue after Mark and TextScript
> Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2018 12:24:29 +0000
>
> %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
> \version "2.19.81"
>
> #(set-global-staff-size 12)
>
> indent = #0
>
> { \textLengthOn
> \time 5/4
> r2 r4.
> \override Score.RehearsalMark.self-alignment-X = #-1
> \override Score.RehearsalMark.font-size = #5
> \mark \markup {"After the thirty-third encore, the Emperor arose."}
> \hide TextScript
> r8\fermata_"mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm"
> r4 |
> %%% \noBreak
> R4*5 | R4*5 | R4*5 |
> }
> %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
>
> When the above is compiled, the spacing for notes/rests after the
> Mark
> and TextScript is increased. This becomes even more obvious if
> \noBreak is uncommented: the final crotchet rest of the first bar and
> the whole bar rest of the second now take up so much horizontal space
> that the line runs outside of the right-hand margin, as is shown in
> the
> attached image. Meanwhile the rests at the start of the first bar
> are
> squashed together to make room for the unnecessary empty spaces later
> in the line. Things are restored to normal after a line break.
>
> If I remove either the RehearsalMark or the TextScript, the problem
> disappears. The purpose of the textscript is to prevent the crotchet
> rest appearing before the "Mark" is finished.
>
> I have used the same kind of structure in numerous other places in
> this
> piece without problems, and despite nearly a day of experimentation I
> can't see why this case behaves differently. (There are reasons for
> presenting these texts as Marks rather than Text attached to a rest,
> but they are not relevant to the problem.)
>
> Any suggestions? Is there perhaps a way of resetting the spacing
> parameters to something sensible?
>
> David
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Pedro Pessoa <address@hidden>
> To: address@hidden
> Subject: Re: Spacing issue after Mark and TextScript
> Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2018 09:26:42 -0700 (MST)
>
> Hey David. Not sure if I got how you want it to be, but - with the
> \nobreak
> uncommented) - if you add tree more m's to the TextScript, it
> produces
> something which looks right. Don't know why.
>
> Pessoa
>
> mailing_Spacing_issue_after_Mark_and_TextScript.png
> <
>
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/file/t5699/mailing_Spacing_issue_after_Mark_and_TextScript.png>
> ;
>
> --
>
>
> True - it looks as if the spacing text (the "mmmm"-s) needs to be as
> far as possible exactly the same length as the TextScript.
>
> But add even one more "m" and the right-hand end of the staff is
> again
> noticeably beyond the right margin.
>
> And even with the "correct" number of "m"s, so that the end of the
> line
> appears in (roughly?) the right place, the rests at the beginning of
> the line are ridiculously compressed together. The space give to the
> crotchet rest at the end of the bar is far greater than that allowed
> for the dotted crotchet earlier in the same bar.
>
> Does anyone have any idea what is going on here?
>
> David
I noticed with version 2.12.3 the output is as desired.
Then I identified the first commit which changes the behaviour. First
bad commit is:
commit 53db923e715126eb9463220526b4838fbfd3dad4
Author: Andrew Hawryluk <address@hidden>
Date: Sat Jan 15 13:42:03 2011 -0700
Change keep-inside-line defaults to true.
As discussed in Issue #1470, the default should be changed so that
good layout with a slight performance hit is the default.
https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/1470/
https://codereview.appspot.com/4243041/
Which is LilyPond-version 2.13.52
Tbh, I never noticed bad behaviour caused by this patch before.
I suspect something rotten is present elsewhere, though I've no clue
what it might be or where to look...
Nevertheless, you could revert the settings done by this patch globally
with:
\layout {
\context {
\Score
\override NonMusicalPaperColumn.keep-inside-line = #'()
\override PaperColumn.keep-inside-line = #'()
}
}
This may have some unwanted effects, though.
Less invasive would be:
#(set-global-staff-size 12)
indent = #0
{ \textLengthOn
\time 5/4
r2 r4.
\overrideProperty Score.NonMusicalPaperColumn.keep-inside-line #'()
\overrideProperty Score.PaperColumn.keep-inside-line #'()
\override Score.RehearsalMark.self-alignment-X = #-1
\override Score.RehearsalMark.font-size = #4
\mark \markup {"After the thirty-third encore, the Emperor arose."}
\hide TextScript
r8\fermata_"mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm"
r4 |
\noBreak
R4*5 | R4*5 | R4*5 |
}
HTH,
Harm
*****************
Once again, I am overwhelmed by the time and effort you must have given
to this, and by the depth of your understanding of the inner workings
of Lilypond. Thank you so much.
I have used your "less invasive" version, and with this I can get the
result I wanted. I actually have the line finishing with the word
"tacet" in a white-out box, in such a way that the stave appears to
finish early followed by "tacet" ending at the margin. I also did this
in an earlier movement, but without any obvious spacing problems
showing up.
The parameters NonMusicalPaperColumn and suchlike have long been a
mystery to me. If it can be done reasonably succinctly, could you
perhaps explain what NonMusicalPaperColumn.keep-inside-line #'() and
PaperColumn.keep-inside-line #'() actually do?
David
- Spacing issue after Mark and TextScript, David Sumbler, 2018/11/21
- Re: Spacing issue after Mark and TextScript, Pedro Pessoa, 2018/11/21
- Re: Spacing issue after Mark and TextScript, David Sumbler, 2018/11/23
- Re: Spacing issue after Mark and TextScript, Thomas Morley, 2018/11/24
- Re: Spacing issue after Mark and TextScript, Thomas Morley, 2018/11/24
- Re: Spacing issue after Mark and TextScript,
David Sumbler <=
- Re: Spacing issue after Mark and TextScript, Phil Holmes, 2018/11/25
- Re: Spacing issue after Mark and TextScript, Thomas Morley, 2018/11/25
- Re: Spacing issue after Mark and TextScript, David Sumbler, 2018/11/25
- Re: Spacing issue after Mark and TextScript, Thomas Morley, 2018/11/25