Your earlier confusion (in another thread) among invisible objects, layered staves, and hidden staves comes to mind. Are you using hidden staves for playback yet? Or, as in so many of the suggestions we've made, are you simply rejecting them out of hand?
the very early versions of NWC (mid-1990s) produced pretty raw-looking scores.
Show me where I have been abusive, demeaning, obscene, or even just "snide".
NoteWorthy Version 1 would have been a joke as a serious music-engraving program
it can hardly avoid remaining a joke.
Please open a multi-stave file in Noteworthy. Now, under the file menu, choose "Page Setup." Click on the tab at the far left, labeled "contents." You will see two text boxes, one labeled "groups" and the other labeled "visible parts." The "visible parts" box will contain the same number of lines of text as there are staves in your score. Each of these lines will consist of the name of one of the staves, plus a checkbox at the left end of the line. By default, each of these is checked. If you uncheck any of them, the staff it corresponds with will disappear completely from the screen. Vanished. Kaput. Gone. But it will still play during playback.
Would anyone care to defend the position that though the behavior should be corrected, the developer(s) are fully entitled to sit on it forever, even though they have sold an imperfect product?
Do you understand yet? Your insights are welcome. Your tone is not. This forum is designed to point to possible improvements in the program, not to insult the intelligence of the programmer. We are Eric's helpers, not his superiors. And, no, you aren't his superior either.
Today, in just one reply, you managed abusive, demeaning and snide:
This thread concerns a situation where the length of a measure as calculated by NoteWorthy (and please, let's handle the question of whether NoteWorthy should calculate the length of a measure in its own thread) differs according to whether a note is represented by a single half note or two tied quarter notes.
You don't need these bugs fixed. These aren't the solutions you are looking for. Time to move along ...
It might do you a world of good if you would practice a little tolerance, too.
You will find it of no humoristic value, because you clearly have forgotten how to laugh
I have not published music, but I doubt that industry is substantially different from the book-publishing world... [emphasis added]
I'm not sure that there IS an algorithm which could decide where (in the time stream) the next note goes, and still make everyone happy. <snip>I would be glad to be proven wrong, but I would really like to see a set of rules that would result in what the user wants.
Please make sure the copy is legible.
it's all the same, because the publisher will redo it in house style anyway.
Page created in 0.056 seconds with 24 queries.