Add "User" text styles to Inspector dropdown for fingering

• Jan 3, 2019 - 16:36
Reported version
3.0
Priority
P0 - Critical
Type
Functional
Frequency
Once
Severity
S3 - Major
Reproducibility
Always
Status
fixed
Regression
Yes
Workaround
No
Project

OS: Windows 10 (10.0), Arch.: x86_64, MuseScore version (64-bit): 3.0.0.4839, revision: cf1f5ce

A user on English (international) guitar forum does not understand the limitation of the fingering text styles in the Inspector drop down.
I quote: "I used to have a custom text style in Musescore 2 for offset fingering that would appear in the inspector drop down. Now (version 3.0.0.4785) it appears I'm limited only to other fingering text styles when I attempt to edit in the inspector"
And he attached an image:

Image 2.png

He is right indeed, since in the 2.3.2 - image below - the drop down contained all available text styles, as for other elements.
Deliberated? Forgotten? Work in progress?

staff.jpg


Comments

It's deliberate in that the placement algorithms use the text style to decide how to place things, and we wouldn't have a clue how to position them otherwise. Is there a real world use case where the available styles are not sufficient (given that, of course, you can customize them)?

" Is there a real world use case where the available styles are not sufficient (given that, of course, you can customize them)?"
Sorry, I do not really understand this. I have not really follow during the development of 3.0 all these changes about text styles. And so, I cannot follow your explanations satisfactorily.
I was simply here the relay of a testimony. I understand that the user complains that, in the 3.0, he cannot do somethings to customize fingerings with the Inspector drop down, while he could do it with 2.3.2. Do you agree with that (it would be an introduced limitation?), or have I missed something?

In reply to by cadiz1

I agree it is a change, but a change we made deliberately, because we don't know of any real world use for giving a fingering any style other than one actually designed to work with fignering, and we would rather not confuse users by making them think it would be a normal thing to do.

If there is an important real world use case for this, that would change my feeling about whether we should fix this and risk confusing normal users , or leave it as we have currently designed it, so only styles that are actually designed to work reasonably are available.

User's reply (I asked him what style he used in the 2.3.2, and for what reason.) What I see on the picture below is that he created a custom style (two en fact, LH and string number)
I quote the reply: "Sure, the offset left hand fingering that I mentioned above is probably the one I used the most. When I wanted fingering just above the note (and not to the left, or above the beam) I used this: "

Capture2.JPG

So, after a few tries.
Example, I go to Format / Style / Text styles, I create a new style with certain settings let's say for particular lyrics, eg "User-1-lyrics".
Then, in the score, I select all lyrics. In Inspector, the drop down gives me access to all text styles, including my new "User-1-lyrics"
But, if I do the same thing with a new style for Fingering and some settings (size, X/Y) let's say "User-2-Fingering." And then I select all similar fingerings: result, in Inspector, the drop down does not display other styles, other than fingerings, AND also my new "User-2-Fingering" style is missing.
Did I understand the problem (and the one the user encounters too), or did I miss something again?

Title Custom fingering text styles are limited to other fingering text styles Add "User" text styles to Inspector dropdown for fingering
Priority P0 - Critical

So the user desn't just want to change the LH fingering style, he wants a choice between regular LH fingering and his custom version, correct? And his expectation is that when applying a custom version, the default position will be directly over the notehead, so his adjustments can move it accordingly, and furthermore expects that automatic placement will not try to move this above the staff/stem/beam? We should be able to implement that. I would still recommend we do so by only allowing the "user" styles, not the other text styles like staff text that work totally differently (they are applied relative to the staff, not relative to the individual note, and of course automatic placement works totally different for staff text versus fingering).\

It's also worth asking if this particular layout should be the default for LH Guitar Fingering when multiple voices are involved, though. I already submitted a PR to change the default back to being next to the notehead. It shouldn't be hard to make it also move the fingering up a space if there are multiple voices. And, presumably, down for voice 2, as shown in the picture? Looks nice to me, but I don't know if that's the most common arrangement or not.

1) "So the user desn't just want to change the LH fingering style, he wants a choice between regular LH fingering and his custom version, correct?"
That's right.
User's new reply, I quote: "Yes, I wanted to keep the default fingering styles and leave them "intact", simply adding my new style preference to the list of choices. I think I understood at the time that I could have done it the way you suggest [note: I suggested to create a template with custom fingering] but chose not to. In 3.0, that option seems to have been removed, so I'm trying to understand what the program would rather have me do."

2) "I already submitted a PR to change the default back to being next to the notehead. It shouldn't be hard to make it also move the fingering up a space if there are multiple voices. And, presumably, down for voice 2, as shown in the picture? Looks nice to me, but I don't know if that's the most common arrangement or not."

The expected default (most common display) is to the left, as for the versions 2.x - see images below.

ex1.jpg
ex2.jpg

In reply to by cadiz1

Other point:
And for my part, I would vote for number strings be moved by default below the staff (and not above as currently). They are rarely used to indicate string 1 (and thus presumably for a note or notes entered in Voice1), but to indicate an alternative solution to the location of a note.
For example, D 5th fret 5th string, instead of a D 4th open string (as shown second image, end first measure). And so all these notes are most often in voice 2/3/4, and therefore the indication of the string number is naturally below or within the staff (you can see other examples on the same attachment), but not above.

BTW, I lied when I said I had already submitted a PR to deal with LH fingering placement. I've written code, it mostly works, but not quite well enough. Biggest issue is getting good placement with multiple fingerings (eg, both LH & RH). The images above show something that looks good to me - RH being outside the stem/beam. I guess our 2.x compromise was not so bad, really, main issue is that the fingerings could collide easily with other things, especially for notes at beginning of measure, or if you change pitch / add accidentals after adding a fingering. And 3.0 has the potential to fix those.

Between this and the "fingering mode" I've implemented, this something I hope we can address in the next update. That is, we;re looking at a more imminent update for crashes and the like, but let's step back and see what it will take to really improve fingering more significantly in the very near future. Open to other suggestions as to what to consider.

Ok, hoping it does not take too long. Because right now, it's just a pain to move at the good place the LH fingerings one by one. In a few words, to pass them over the stem (when it is up) and get them to the left down near the notehead. It takes two-three seconds each fingering. In short, it's discouraging, and I gave up, waiting for better days.

Fix version
3.0.1