----- Original Message -----
From: "Andrew Bernard" <andrew.bern...@gmail.com>
To: <lilypond-user@gnu.org>
Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2016 2:04 PM
Subject: Re: Using strings and other types to return markup
Hi Phil,
On 11/05/2016, 9:12 PM, "lilypond-user on behalf of Phil Holmes"
<lilypond-user-bounces+andrew.bernard=gmail....@gnu.org on behalf of
m...@philholmes.net> wrote:
2. It's a bit more complicated, though. 16th century printers have a
habit
of eliding an n from a word and instead putting what looks like (but might
not be) a tiny tilde above the previous letter to show this.
I was also wondering why you were not using Unicode. Anyway, do you have
any images showing examples of this 16c practice? I would be interested to
have a look. This is, as you say, a different requirement to using a fixed
unicode glyph from a font. I think I have seen similar practice in 18c
English printed text, but I don’t think the wiggles that I have seen are
tildes as such. You are reaLly after something for text glyphs that is
similar to an ornament on a note glyph.
Now that I come to think of it, there is a vast typographic tradition of
putting symbols on top of letters to mean various abbreviations, for
example the old No. with a bar over the o to mean the abbreviation for
number. A really interesting topic. The scheme code is definitely worth
having in hand.
Here we go - late C16 (1597 to be precise). Note also the abbreviated
"ye" - I think this is a tiny "e" above the "y".
--
Phil Holmes
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
