There seems to be a lot of odds and ends missing in it. Particularly in the Chant notation, and time signature areas. I like the font in and of itself what I see of it. The whole idea of Smufl probably would be better served if it was not a "conscript" style encoding project. Eventually the Unicode consortium might get its act together and have a truly useful standard. Not to knock the Unicode people but it might have been wise to aggregate a committee of people from such music software entities and a few rastrographically knowledgeable musicologists or better musicians.
Shane On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 3:53 PM, Michael Rivers <[email protected]>wrote: > I saw that too. It's bolder and more "engraved" looking than the other > commercial music fonts, at least. I don't know what to think about the new > music font format. > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Bravura-new-font-tp146234p146235.html > Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > _______________________________________________ > lilypond-user mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user >
_______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
