Text offset units

• Jan 19, 2019 - 10:55

I have just installed Musescore 3 and wanted to rework my templates before switching to that version.
Unfortunately I found that I could not get the same results as in previous versions (text left aligned in a vertical box with more than 100 mm) due to limitations and a bug in offset units.

In "text style" and in the documentation, the unit is supposed to be (and shows as) spaces but in the navigator and output the unit remains millimeters. The field limitation givess a maximum offset of 100 mm instead of 150 mm (with a space unit fixed to 1.5 mm)


In reply to by Marc Sabatella

Yes, attached is a pdf file showing what I wrote using MuseScore 2.3.2. It prints nicely on half an A4 page so I can get 2 * A5 scores for my choir.

I put a screen print of my trial for the same psalm using MuseScore 3.0.1 (french) and circled the offset value assigned to subtitle (on my score it shows the Psalm number).

What you can see is that the horizontal offset value set in the text style window is in spaces (french esp.) but the inspector on the right displays the same value but in millimeters. The sored display shows as well an offset of 99 millimeters and not 99 spaces which woul give 148.5 millimeters in my case as my page scale is set to 1.5 mm.

A limitation to 99.9 spaces would be enough for me but millimeters are too short.

Attachment Size
190203_Psaume_70.pdf 47.94 KB
Psalm using MuseScore 3.png 209.92 KB

In reply to by Marc Sabatella

Attached are the following files :
190203_Psaume_70 (Mus.2).mscz - Original score written using MusScore 2
Sans_fin,_je_proclamerai (Mus 3 import).mscz - Same file obtained in MuseScore 3 when importing previous one
190203_Psaume 70 (Mus 3 new).mscz - Score obtained by re-writing file with MuseScore 3
The only difference in scores written with MuseScore 3 is the title tha has been shortened to avoid text collisions.

In reply to by PDubus

Sorry, I have been away at conferences the past couple of weeks.

If I understand correctly, the bug is this:

1) you cannot use the Inspector to specify an offset of more than 99.99 for text elements
2) you also cannot use Format / Style / Text Styles to specify an offset of more than 99.99

As a result, while you can manually create larger offsets by dragging or using the cursor keys, you cannot set this as a style default.

Correct? If so, then normally, a first step to having this investigated further would be to file an official bug report in the issue tracker (eg, using Help / Report a Bug from within MuseScore). However, there is a related existing issue #283600: Offset limited to 99.99sp in Inspector, prevents precisely moving elements in frames from left to right just submitted a couple of days ago. I've updated it to reference this thread.

In reply to by Marc Sabatella

You are right for one point of my claim and the issue #238600 describes the same problem.
The second point that I described for the same issue is that, even if the numbers are the same in both Text Style and Inspector, the units are different.
When I use Format / Style / Text Styles, the unit is space as described in the documentation (by default 1space = 1.764 mm) but in the Inspector the unit is mm. 99 spaces would give an offset of 175 mm but only 99 mm are shown on Inspector and applied to the score.

In reply to by PDubus

I'm not sure which is actually correct, certain text styles are set to scale with spatium and others are not and this is on purpose. So my sense is the Inspector has it right, the style dialog should probably be updated. But there have been numerous back and forth changes in this area, not sure my understanding is really accurate. In any case, worth submitting as a separate issue once we understand what the expected behavior actually is.

In reply to by Marc Sabatella

If you're not sure, What could I say?
I will not take part in a discussion to know which unit is correct but I am ready to accept different units for frames, score or lyrics. The best could, may be, to give the choice to the user but, in any case, this has to be specified, explained and correctly applied by the software.

For the present case, the only thing I am sure is :
1. The limitation to 99.99 does not allow to save correctly some layouts (case #283600).
2. Documentation and software are incoherent. Documentation specifies spaces, Software applies millimeters.
3. I cannot use released versions 3 for my work and sticks to version 2.

I have contacted you on this post following the advice given on bug report. May be I have been too shy and should have reported directly as a bug. Do I have to learn bug report procedure or can you do it on my behalf using this post as reference?

In reply to by PDubus

No one is doubting that the 99.99 limit is bad. The question is what the correct units really should be for these particular items. My sense is that since they don't scale with spatium, using sp as a unit probably doesn't make sense, so the correct unit is probably mm - again, just for the specific objects that don't scale with sp. But maybe there are reasons sp makes sense anyhow.

Anyhow, I am not understanding how this bug prevents use of MuseScore 3 for your work. From what I can tell, it still works, you just need a few extra clicks to manaully adjust the subtitle position. And whatever extra work that is should be more than paid back by what you save not having to manually adjust everything else.

Actually, you should probably be able to hand-edit your template to make your subtitle offset the default.

In reply to by Marc Sabatella

Thanks a lot for the trick I didn't think of as score files are usually saved in compressed format and cannot be read.
I have saved my file in uncompressed format (mscx), modified manually the offset values that I wanted larger than 100 and It works. Fortunately these larger values can also be inherited using templates or style sheets.
I can now use MuseScore 3 to get the exact layout that I wish to have and just wait for the next releases for the limitation and unit inconsistency to clear away.

MuseScore is a software that I appreciate and recommend.
Keep on this good work.

Thanks ad regards;

Do you still have an unanswered question? Please log in first to post your question.