• "Relative to Current Position"
• "Relative to middle C of the Clef/Transposition"

Static Displacement can be renamed "Non-Relative Displacement" (maybe there's a better word for non-relative). In your description you say that it measures from the staff's top line. However, it looks to be measuring from the center (3rd) line. I.e., When I set the displacement to 0 the rests congregate on/above the 3rd staff line. Is this correct?

Ken

Everytime I see "Move" in the Rests part of this pligin I think it means vertically - even after spending the last hour working with the displacement function. This may be because the Move Rest Plugin that comes with Finale does move things vertically. Can there be a clear distinction? Maybe you would consider the following. Instead of -

Resize
Clear Position
Visibility
Move
Position Style
Beaming
Presence
Displacement
Static Displacement

How about -

Resize
Visibility
Presence
Horizontal Displacement {replaces "Move"}
Clear Horizontal Displacement {replaces "Clear Position"}
Vertical Position Style
Relative Vertical Displacement
Non-Relative Vertical Displacement
Beaming

This allows me to see what a function is meant to do with having to click on it to see its options first. It also place simpler functions next to each other (e.g., horizontal moving/clearing,  vertical moving/clearing, visibility/presence. I understand that you're trying to have all the other element lists be the same (Note Entries, Noteheads, etc.) but maybe you would consider reordering those as well.

Ken

Please permit me to take another shot at convincing you to clarify the "Move" title under the "Rests" heading.

I do understand your desire to keep things consistent with the other headings. However, without stating which direction the "Move" function is meant to handle, that title under "Rests" is not the clearest or most intuitive title to use with Finale because of the follow reasons:

1. The "Move Rests..." plugin that comes with Finale moves rests vertially not horizontal. When I see Rests/Move in your plugin I automatically think that's for vertical moving - like the other plugin.
2. I believe Finale generally does a better job at automatically moving rests horizontally out of the way (automatic spacing) - and I would think most users would still first use the Beat Chart to move rests horizontally, especially when working on a score where the rhythms are supposed to line up. Anyone who works on piano music and multipart staves knows how Finale is not as good at moving rests vertically out of the way (since the layer placement options are not dynamic). So, at least for me, moving rests vertically is a more common chore. Therefore, when I see "Rests/Move" I think, "Great! I can move my rest up out of the way with this!" {Click} "Oh, no. I can't."
3.  Since "moving" and "displacing" are synonyms, the titles must express to the user any basic difference you have programmed into these functions without the user having to click on them first. I would think you'd want to avoid puzzling the user with the titles simply because differentiating adverbs are missing from those verbs.

Ken

Post Edited (Jari Williamsson) : 2/4/2012 3:40:58 PM (GMT-6)

How about this?

Change "Displace" to "Transpose" - It may be weird to think of rests as transposed but since the Displace function is so closely tied to the tonality of a passage I think a user would more easily draw the association between the rests position and the key/clef of this function. It would also make it more consistent with the term used to vertically "move" notes.

Change "Displacement" to "Reposition" since the use of this funtion is to re-position rests that have already be "placed" manually or using a Placement Style.

Ken

PS Since you bring up the mess of the Articulation Definition DBX, I consider your "Rests/Placement Style" equivalent to "the Articulation's Designer's "Position" (ie.., Above Note, etc.) and your "Rests/Placement" equal to the setting "Default Vertical Position" of the Articulation Designer. (The Articulation's Designer's "Positioning" [i.e., Avoid staff lines, etc.] checkboxes I consider to be "Position Options")

Is there a logic to the order the main elements are listed (i.e., Notes, Noteheads, Rests, Stems, etc.). Most popular elements to be edited first maybe?
With 11 elements already list and hopefully more to come (Ties, Clefs, Chords, Textboxes, Lyrics ) it would be helpful simply to do aphabetical order - like the document options DBX. (Although the dropdowns in the Doc/Opt DBX is still a mess - Doc/Opt/Fonts/Noteheads, in particular).

Ken
BTW Why aren't Ties included in this plugin?

Post Edited (Jari Williamsson) : 2/11/2012 4:31:55 AM (GMT-6)

1. A user opening the Change plugin is looking to do something specific. If they want to move rests up/down they could think of a number of titles to look for including "Placement, Vertical Placement, Position, Vertical Position, Move Vertically, Move Up/Down, Transpose, etc." Of course we've already been through this.  However, if they see "Horizontal Position" under this element or other elements I believe it is nature for a user to then look for "Vertical Position" if he wants to move something...well...vertically. As a user, it would never occur to me that the name would be something else simply because it uses a different unit of measurement!  In fact, I wouldn't even remember that vertical rest movement only uses one unit of measurement until after I stumbled on the right title - but by then I've already looked for the logical counterpart to Horizontal Position (Vertical Position), not found it and poked my way through "Placement Style" and "Placement" reading the description of each just to see if I'm using the right thing. Units of measurement is something a user deals with/thinks about when they're about to input the numbers, not when they're trying to trying to find the right command. Your naming convention presupposes an understanding that I don't think users will have.
2. Vertical Position tells the user with more specificity what the function does, especially since Placement Style is already in use and a user can easily get confused with Placement vs Placement Style (Yes, users should investigate all commands they see and RTFM but my point is that the more intuitive title from the user's perspective is usually the best.). What is more important to the user's ability to find what they need when they open the plugin? - a title that distinguishes the actual function of one command from another or a title that simply distinguishs what unit of measurement a command's unclarified function may or may not use?
3. Why wait until MM adds vertical EVPU adjustment of rests to use the most natural title? When/if MM does that will you then change the title of the command - which will further confuse people who have gotten used to the old name. If MM ever does add that functionality perhaps you could allow users to change the unit of measurement from within the command's options (ratios or dropdown box) rather than having two separate places (e.g., Rests/Placement for spaces, Rests/Vertical Position for EVPUs) and rather than confusing people by renaming Placement. In fact, you may not even need to add anything. Currently, parts of your plugin allow users to switch units of measurement on the fly by typing the letter after the number they input (e.g., With Noteheads/Vertical Position typing 2e will move the notehead up 2 EVPUs, 2i will move it up 2 inches, 2s will move it up 2 spaces, etc.). Why not setup Rests with "Vertical Position" now so that if MM adds that functionality there wouldn't need to be an interface change that the user has to deal with? The fact that a user would go into Rest/Vertical Position now and would only be able to move them by spaces won't bother a user (at least the name wouldn't) - we've been adjusting the vertical position of rests using spaces for a long time and only expect movement by spaces.

Ken