Hi Karlin,
I looked over the list, focusing on the shape notes. Nothing stood out
to me as being wrong, although I have no skill for the font design
concerns here.
To be honest, neither do I. I'm just making sure the glyphs match up and
are categorized correctly, which is more an archival perspective than a
design-based one. Thanks for giving it a look!
It looks like the majority of the red=contentious cells for shape
notes are in the Walker shapes. I am not aware there is a living music
tradition or community still using these or the Funk ones, as there is
for Aiken and Sacred Harp. The value of Walker and Funk shapes would
mainly be for reproducing historical works.
Therefore, I would say feel free to do whatever makes sense and
results in usable fonts. There is unlikely to be many "normal" users
with highly-specific concerns for Walker shapes. And if someone is
doing a labor-of-love scholarly historical reproduction of a
Walker-heads work, it is doubtful this project can foresee what they
would care about without having such an expert available at this point.
Ah, that makes sense. In that case, I'll take a bit closer look at
Funk's and Walker's source material and make sure the output is
nice/consistent enough not to be too bothersome. That way, whenever a
shape-note user does come along, if they spot mistakes, at least they'll
be consistent and thus easy to work around.
You are reaching a point where I am starting to go, "Eh, if Owen Lamb
studied and designed something for LilyPond fonts, it's probably fine."
That's very kind of you! However, I'm going to keep asking for advice.
When I work on a project, I'll often miss some glaringly obvious detail,
so I prefer to make sure everything checks out with fresh pairs of eyes.
Owen
