Re: accent and marcato shouldn't be quantized

[Trevor Daniels]

Mark Polesky wrote Wednesday, December 09, 2009 9:05 AM
>

> Wow. It's been just over 94 (and a half) *days* since my last 
> transmission here. If > anyone is curious, I am still alive,

Hi Mark - good to hear it ;)

> Which brings me to my question:

> Currently there are 11 scripts for which 'quantize-position is set 
> to #t (accent
> accentus circulus comma espressivo ictus marcato semicirculus 
> staccato tenuto
> varcomma). I used my handy ly:filter-alist procedure for this (see
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2009-05/msg00438.html):
>
> #(display (ly:filter-alist default-script-alist 
> 'quantize-position))
>
> In case you didn't already know, quantize-position basically means 
> "center this
> script vertically between two staff lines so it's close to the 
> note head but not
> touching it". However, in common practice the accent and marcato 
> marks are (more
> often than not) kept out of the staff entirely (see Kurt Stone, 
> pp.5-6), ie.
> quantize-position should not be set to #t for those two scripts.

It does seem to be the practice with Dover and Oxford.

> Is this an oversight, or is there some reason for this? Would 
> there be any
> opposition to removing the relevant lines in script.scm (currently 
> lines 24 and
> 149)?

I wouldn't object, but we'd need a consensus from a
reasonable number of developers.

> On a related note, the excellent solution* (by Mats) for 
> controlling this
> individually for each script (using scriptDefinitions) should go 
> into the docs, I
> think. Are any of these places suitable?
>
> 1.3.1 Attached to notes
> 4.4 Placement of objects
> 5.4.2 Direction and placement
>
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2009-03/msg00210.html

Not as direct text.  It would need to go in the LSR
and be tagged as "Expressive marks".

Trevor