Re: names of vertical spacing dimensions

[David Kastrup]

Valentin Villenave <address@hidden> writes:

> On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 9:42 AM, David Kastrup <address@hidden> wrote:
>> Let me put it bluntly: the new scheme cements the decision to make
>> markups and titles have the same spacing.
>
> Greetings David,
>
> Quoting Mark (the man through whom the scandal cometh!)

That is the wrong characterization of Mark's work.  He is just dragging
it into the light: as far as I understand, his patch does not change
behavior as much as names.

> in the very first mail in this thread,
>
> "
> Obviously not all markups are titles, but all titles are
> markups, right?
> "

"All titles are markups", "all markups should get the same spacing",
"sane document design".

Pick any two.

> Fair point. However I don't remember LilyPond having the ability to
> print footnotes (or proper endnotes, for that matter) *at all*.
> http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=737

Lilypond has the ability to place markup below, above and between
scores, and the documentation has ample examples.

> As you said, we need to have different levels of hierarchy, and
> ideally, a scheme where we could add as many levels as we'd like.

Is that "ideally" in the meaning of "not now" or "too cumbersome"?
Numbers would likely work reasonably well as a priority.  We use them
for things like outside-staff-spacing without too much of a complaint.
Other than that, I don't see that one needs a formal grouping of layout
elements.  We've been getting along with one name per element reasonably
well.  Being able to specify topological relations instead of numerical
priorities might be cooler, but we don't have that elsewhere.

-- 
David Kastrup