Am 01.04.19 um 08:59 schrieb Johan Vromans:
On Mon, 1 Apr 2019 11:37:42 +1100, Andrew Bernard
<andrew.bern...@gmail.com> wrote:
Now to learn Metafont then. Shouldn't be too hard -
As a retired TeXnician I have deep respect for TeX and MetaFont.
Nevertheless I think the right way now is to go for widely accepted
standards where possible.
So I'd rather see decent SMuFL integration than more home grown Emmentaler
extensions.
SMuFL integration and using Metafont for glyph creation don’t
contradict, do they? Of course we should concentrate on glyphs requested
by SMuFL instead of “home grown” symbols. But why not use Metafont for
that? And if someone misses a glyph in Emmentaler that is not in SMuFL
one should make an enhancement request
(https://github.com/w3c/smufl/issues or
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-music-notation-contrib/)
Of course we would have to rename the Emmentaler glyphs and have a
script that puts them at the correct code points in the font. And we
would have to look at the specification
(https://w3c.github.io/smufl/gitbook/specification/) for glyph metrics,
ligatures etc. Probably when metrics change there have to be changes in
the LilyPond source code too …
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user