On Wednesday, 22 April 2015 at 06:39:16 am +0200, Élie Roux wrote:
> Le 22/04/2015 04:38, Henry T. So Jr. a écrit :
> > I have had one problem with the greciliae font (and Caeciliae before
> > it), which is that the stropha and the "punctum inclinatum" look too
> > similar.  I feel like it's probably too presumptuous of me to change
> > those glyphs for everyone, but at same time, to create and maintain a
> > whole other font for the sake of two glyphs (the stropha and it's
> > liquescent counterpart) seems overkill.
> 
> Absolutely. In fact I'm very glad you raise the problem, because you're
> not the only one not liking the stropha of Greciliae. Attached is a font
> (a fork from an outdated greciliae-base.sfd) containing a changed
> stropha, what do you think about it?

I'll admit that I much (much much much much...) prefer the version in
the file you attached.

> > What do you think of implementing some sort of variant system?  It could
> > be as straightforward as creating extra glyphs and having the user
> > redefine the symbols as desired, or as complex as having macros that do
> > the same. I have noticed that we already have some support for font
> > variation in the "punctum cavum" glyphs, so maybe this idea is not too
> > far-fetched.
> 
> I think it's the way to go, indeed!

We should discuss this further.  I will open an issue on github.

> > I think we can also use such a feature for the alternate (older) oriscus
> > shape that was discussed on the list a few years ago.
> 
> I admit I can't remember that... Do you have a pointer?

http://www.mail-archive.com/gregorio-users%40gna.org/msg01991.html

(which actually was less than a year ago)

Thanks,
Henry

_______________________________________________
Gregorio-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/gregorio-devel

Répondre à