IMO, when the Blank Space Notehead is selected, the augmentation dots should appear as grey in the Editor and not appear in the Viewer or Print Preview, and no space for augmentation dots should be reserved in Viewer or Print Preview.
When the Blank Space Notehead is in use, chances are good that the user is adding a notehead as text and it would be a simple matter to add any augmentation dots needed as text.
This change would aid in fixing those few cases where NWC misplaces augmentation dots. It would also aid in those songs that are visibly in simple meter but are being scored in compound meter. Duplets would also benefit from this change.
I agree that the dot shouldn't appear. Not so sure about space being reserved: I haven't tested this, but it seems as though the space might be needed in most cases. In cases where it was not needed and would create spacing problems among the notes with visible heads, adding one or two extra spaces to one or more of the visible noteheads via the "add extra space" command should be adequate. (Of course, this might also work the other direction: adding spaces where the lack of extra space for the dot caused problems.)
Thanks for responding. This is one of those
abstract issues that doesn't get much response from folks until they want some special formatting that NWC refuses to provide.
Perhaps, but I was trying to be consistent with:
IMO, the same case can be made for hidden augmentation dots (https://forum.noteworthycomposer.com/?topic=7594.0) as for "hidden notes".
Hmmm, something to think about but my first thoughts are that a blank space notehead that you are describing is not quite the same thing as the hidden items that NoteWorthy declared their goal for. Distinctly different things although may be used to the same end in some cases.
Also, looking now at your case for hidden augmentation dots, there are instances where you might want the space to be maintained. That is where you are using hidden rests on a chord to build tremolos. But I guess you could always move a non hidden rest into the area above 2000.
Needs more consideration . Bah .......
I like your idea, Rick, except I'm not sure I understand agree with this quote. I would like to have the dots invisible in the print preview and viewer, and of course, when printing, but I would like the space taken up by the dots to be kept.
The reason is that when I use a 0-stem headless note to anchor text-based comping slashes, I like the flexibility it would seem to give me to indicate rhythm changes. For instance, slashes on beats 1 the second half of beat 2.
Mind you, with something like that I'd probably want to show an eighth rest too, but I haven't thought through this yet.
The notehead is blank , rather than hidden, but the proposal is to
hide the augmentation dot. IMO, (an opinion that seems to be shared by NoteWorthy), hidden items should not change spacing.
Example? (I've tried to imagine where this might be an issue, but I can't)
Since the introduction of the HideRest option, I have not found an instance where I need to do this. It is quite the kludge, it does rather strange things to the EMF file (both the one that you might create from Print Preview and the spool file that Windows creates for printing.) I would regret the User Tip that I wrote (https://forum.noteworthycomposer.com/?topic=5868.0) except that it was probably responsible for the HideRest option being added to NWC 2.1
I would think that reserving space for hidden augmentation dots works against you. If your goal is to have spacing indicate rhythm, a dotted 16th should not use more space than an 8th. I have little use for comping slashes in my work, but if they are common for enough users, NWC should support them directly. As it is, slurs and ties don't work very well with noteheads that are twice as tall as standard noteheads.
Thanks again to both of you for looking at this.
But this isn't hidden - it's blank, so a dot should be also be blank (invisible as opposed to hidden) to be consistent with the notehead but neither notehead nor dot should change default spacing since they are not hidden. This would still agree with NoteWorthy's goal for hidden items as opposed to blank items.
I may be wide of the mark here, but wouldn't this example have the wrong spacing if the space for the augmentation dots were not maintained ?
(Tremolo signs not included in clip)
!NoteWorthyComposerClip(2.0,Single)
|Clef|Type:Treble
|TimeSig|Signature:4/4
|RestChord|Dur:4th,Dotted|Opts:Stem=Down,ArticulationsOnStem,HideRest|Dur2:Half,Dotted|Pos2:-4
|RestChord|Dur:4th,Dotted|Opts:Stem=Down,ArticulationsOnStem,HideRest|Dur2:Half,Dotted|Pos2:-4
|RestChord|Dur:8th|Opts:Stem=Down,ArticulationsOnStem,HideRest|Dur2:4th|Pos2:-4
|RestChord|Dur:8th|Opts:Stem=Down,ArticulationsOnStem,HideRest|Dur2:4th|Pos2:-4
|Bar
!NoteWorthyComposerClip-End
My proposal is for the dots to be hidden. I need a construct that has the duration of a dotted note but the appearance of an undotted note. If I can't get the same minimum spacing out of it an undotted notes it has little value. Others can easily add space between notes, but the minimum space I get with space reserved for the dots is not useful.
Your tremolo example makes no sense to me. Possibly if you attach and example with all the layers.
Perhaps the real answer should be an optional note property for hidden augmentation dots. I have a feeling you've suggested just this elsewhere but I don't remember for certain and am not up bothering with a search at the moment.
It would probably be useful to have control over each element of every object. The problem is that the User Interface becomes intimidating and unwieldy. My thought was simply that since the user is suppling a custom notehead, it might not be too much to ask of the user to also supply the augmentation dot if one is needed. Perhaps I'm wrong. It wouldn't be the first time ...
I have (I'll find it if anyone is really curious.)
Not refined but this sort of thing - I know you have a different way of doing these, using additional layers and using actual beamed notes with blank noteheads, but this is just the simple way, One layer for the tremolo and one hidden layer for the sounding notes.
I don't see any Blank Space Noteheads being used in your attachment, so I don't understand why you think that this change would impact it.
Maybe we have got our wires crossed here - but I was referring to your other link where you said :
I replied that you might want them to when you use hidden rests for tremolos.
In this case, the rests are hidden but the dots should make a difference. In this instance, I wasn't talking about blank noteheads, and I don't believe you were in the examples you gave.
When I wrote the message, I hadn't yet begun working on the notation that uses stemmed notes with blank noteheads as anchors for smaller comping slashes. I think it could be useful to retain the visible dot, but I admit it looks a little odd.
!NoteWorthyComposerClip(2.5,Single)
|Bar
|TimeSig|Signature:4/4
|Text|Text:"/"|Font:StaffItalic|Pos:-3|Justify:Center|Placement:AtNextNote
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:-1z
|Text|Text:"/"|Font:StaffItalic|Pos:-3|Justify:Center|Placement:AtNextNote
|Note|Dur:4th,Dotted|Pos:-1z
|Text|Text:"/"|Font:StaffItalic|Pos:-3|Justify:Center|Placement:AtNextNote
|Note|Dur:8th|Pos:-1z
|Text|Text:"/"|Font:StaffItalic|Pos:-3|Justify:Center|Placement:AtNextNote
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:-1z
|Bar
!NoteWorthyComposerClip-End
And text in between. With that method, when NWC justifies this line you will need to manually adjust the positioning of the tremolo slashes. There is no text placement option to "center between notes". The existing wider spacing will be better some of the time and narrower spacing will be better some of the time ...
You could simply use this instead:
And if you created your own font to get a comping slash that looked professional sheet music, you combine a slash and a dot into one glyph.
I've been contemplating this, and my feeling is that if it isn't acceptable for some reason to have a hidden augmentation dot property, then a headless note should probably be dotless too.
The downside of this would be current user tools that would need to be rewritten to place dots where necessary as well as the replacement head...
After some thought, I've come down with Rick on the side of hiding the augmentation dot on a headless dotted note and reserving no space for the dot. There are uses for both behaviors (reserve space/don't reserve space); but space can be added much more easily in NWC than it can be taken away.