[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: packed option
From: |
Juergen Reuter |
Subject: |
Re: packed option |
Date: |
Mon, 14 Mar 2005 19:29:39 +0100 (CET) |
On Mon, 14 Mar 2005, Laura Conrad wrote:
"JR" == Juergen Reuter <address@hidden> writes:
JR> may I suggest to add a 'packed' option to lilypond-book? This could
JR> help enhancing some of the ancient notation examples in the
JR> documentation.
Is this intended to fix some of the problems with parts that use
larger note values as the fundamental "beat"?
No. Which problems in particular are you thinking of?
Or is it to fix the
problem of Petrucci transcriptions looking wierd because modern
spacing algorithms leave more space between larger note values and
Petrucci didn't?
Right. But please note, that the only new thing is that I just added
the "packed" option to lilypond-book. The "packed" variable has been part
of lily almost as long as the "raggedright" variable and is used
analogously (actually, raggedright=##t originally also packed notes in
early lily 1.x, but very soon was factored out into a separate variable).
Or some other problem?
If it's either of the above, I'm in favor. I've been doing some
transcriptions from Odhecaton A, and normally I think Lily's output
looks much better than whatever I transcribed from, but Petrucci
really does beat Lily 2.0 at his own game. See
<http://www.laymusic.org/music/sp/html/pieces/288.html> for an
example.
Indeed, you may want trying to set the packed variable to ##t, but I fear
that you then get something that is too heavily packed.
Greetings,
J�rgen