Lines with "line visible" disabled can't be selected by clicking the invisible line

• May 31, 2019 - 18:28
Reported version
P2 - Medium
S4 - Minor

As titled with attached score:
1. “Show Invisible”, to find cresc. Line in bar 10 is not showing, unless “Inspector” -> tick “Line visible”;
2. Untick “Line visible”, to find this cresc. Line is now showing but not clickable, i.e. it can not be selected and edited, unless tick “Line visible” again.


In reply to by Marc Sabatella

This hidden line is affecting the "ff"'s auto placement if ended as:
affect ff AP.JPG

This hidden line is NOT affecting the "ff"'s auto placement if ended as:
not affect ff AP.JPG

"Any Hidden Element Should Not Be Involved In Auto Placement" - is Better? I Think so, there are some other cases revealing hiddens' involving are making confusions.

This is worth further discussion on the forum, I think. It's normal that a crescendo line will only try to align vertically with a dynamic on the very next note. But I'm not sure if people would want this alignment to be disabled just because they made the line visible. If thats what people on the forum agree on, it should be easy to do. But I can easily not wanting that.

In reply to by Marc Sabatella

It's true: "It's normal that a crescendo line will only try to align vertically with a dynamic on the very next note" -only when it's visible. If it's hidden then it shouldn't take part in auto placement, doing so it can cause confusing, e.g. for earlier this thread:
it's now found it's this hidden cresc. Line is the true reason why "ff' is not responding to it's vertical Y adjustment with it's own AP ticked.

Also an other important reason: with high density scores, hidden elements are taking too much space if they are Auto Placed.

Here's the case that to me shows why I think a lot of people won't want this to change:


It's quite common to use the "cresc" line with an invisible in case like this, I think you normally do want it aligned.

Again, though, I think it's worth discussion in the forum to get more opinions.

In reply to by Marc Sabatella

IT IS a good typical example we DO want they aligned "by default input", and then "ff" should has its own freedom to move independently vertically with it's own "AP" ticked like other stand alone dynamics, and also "cresc. line" should have this freedom not to be locked by "ff". therefore allow easier editing.

I for one, don't want a crescendo with an invisible line aligned with the dynamic on the next note. I want the cresc. tucked up in the space and I would prevent the automatic alignment.

It’s found whether a “system break” exists in the crescendo line makes a difference: without SB, it’s selectable; with SB, the part after SB in the next new line is non-selectable.

In reply to by Marc Sabatella

Hi Marc, this is a very interesting case, you made me thought about for some time today.
A crescendo line is an element formed with two parts: the head + the tail. These two have to be bonded together (unless there is a system break?), and most of the time the tail is hidden. Is it possible to make the head follow automatic placement while allow the hidden tail to collide?
Like this:

crescendo line and “ff” each follows its own automatic placement, as independent element like the others, not to be locked together vertically as a special pair when they are next to each other. if user like they can make them aligned by adjust the Y.

Title Hidden cresc. Line can not be shown and can not be selected? Lines with "line visible" disabled can't be selected by clicking the invisible line

Once again, I encourage someone to continue this discussion in the forum. It's an easy enough change to make, but I'd want to be sure there was widespread consensus, and discussion here in this issue thread won't be seen by more than half a dozen people. Also, there should be a separate Suggestion for this feature. The issue of not being able to select the invisible line is separate.

Workaround No Yes

This is a bug due to the fact that most other invisible elements can be selected and therefore be dragged and edited. Now if the cresc./dim. line is invisible I cannot select that to edit (to get ideal playback) without turning on visible.

About auto placement, I don't yet know how this is encoded, but selectable or not and affecting placement or not are supposed to be different fields, it's confusing to try to understand that the line must not be selectable in order to let it not affect auto placement.

Has there been forum discussion? My original points about the reasons why people might prefer the current behavior remain valid. See the discussion in the other referenced issue and the PR that fixed it to understand the relationship to autoplace.

The line is easily movable without complicated workarounds, just grab it by the text rather than the invisible line.

Indeed, no PR noted. What I recall is this: for normal invisible elements, we can simply ignore them in autoplace. But we can't ignore the crescendo line - we need to honor the text portion. So, the solution chosen was to make the bbox encompass the text only. This works, but the bbox is also what is used to define the clickable area.

Perhaps it would work to have the bbox encompass the whole line, but make the shape be restricted to just the text. That should allow autoplace to ignore the line (since it is based on shape) which still allowing click on the whole line.

The question of alignment needs to be considered separately, though, and once again, really should be done int he forum, where more users can weigh in, since it potentially affects them adversely..

Frequency Once Few

Well, I was going to report that too, until I found this. (it's a bit annoying when transcribing classical pieces which usually don't have lines after cresc./dim.)

Maybe I'm missing something, but if you don't want the line visible, why extend it at all? Why note add the cresc element just on the current note? Then there is no line at all (or just a short stub, but invisible), nothing that could extend to the next page, and no reason to even think about trying to drag by the invisible line you never wanted in the first place. I'm not understanding why you are thinking you want to click the line at all. just make it as short as possible and pretend it isn't there - click the word "cresc" and drag it, use the Inspector, or do whatever else that way.

You extend the crescendo line so it will continue crescendo for the duration of the line rather than maxing out the crescendo when the line ends, which may be several measures early.

In reply to by DanielR

As noted here: it is possible to select the invisible line if you select the first note to which it is attached and use Alt+Right Arrow to select the "next element", the next element being the cresc/dim line. That seems a reasonable workaround. But it would be nicer to to have things working consistently so that invisible lines were selectable by clicking on them as one can with other invisible elements.

Regression Yes No
Workaround Yes No

By the way, one ridiculous thing about the inability to select, e.g., a pedal line with the mouse is that Ctrl+Shift+Drag doesn't work. The user cannot add an invisible pedal line to their palettes to facilitate quickly applying "hidden pedal" marks unlike for instance hidden tempo marks, unless there's some other way to do so besides ctrl+shift+drag.