Re: Double-underline markup

[Thomas Morley]

Am So., 20. Okt. 2019 um 05:38 Uhr schrieb Carl Sorensen <address@hidden>:
>
>
>
> On 10/19/19, 3:13 AM, "Thomas Morley" <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>     Am Fr., 18. Okt. 2019 um 19:21 Uhr schrieb Carl Sorensen <address@hidden>:
>     >
>     > Why not add it to lilypond proper?  I think that we would want to be 
> careful about property names (perhaps with an underline-details property to 
> minimize namespace pollution), but I think it would make a great addition to 
> Lilypond.
>          Carl: I don't understand your details-suggestion, could you
>     explain more detailed?
>
> IIUC, underlined text is a TextScript object.  Adding a "count" property to a 
> TextScript object would apparently not apply to an underline, but to the 
> TextScript as a whole.  So if we want to add underline as a property of a 
> TextScript object instead of an argument to a function call, we would need to 
> somehow indicate the property applied to the underline.
>
> So adding a property to TextScript (probably via the text-interface)  called 
> underline-details  that would be an alist (like fret-diagram-details) and 
> could have properties like thickness, color, count, gap, padding, etc.  Then 
> they would clearly apply to the underline.  And you could set the defaults 
> exactly like the current underline properties, so there would be no change to 
> the existing code, and no convert-ly rule would be required.
>
> I don't know if this is the best way to do it, but it's one way to do it.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Carl

Hi Carl,

thanks for your detailed explanation. It's now perfectly clear to me
what you mean.
Alas, your suggestion is based upon the assumption markup is always
TextScript, which is not true.
\markup _is_ used for TextScript, but can be used for LyricText as
well, or to specify another grob's stencil or even for toplevel text,
etc.

I don't see how a grob-details-subproperty could apply to all possible cases.

Thanks,
  Harm