Thanks Werner for pointing this out.
It would help if I read the SMuFL standard before commenting. :-) So I
think my previous comments are invalid. Now that I have read the
standard v 0.6, I see that it works hand in hand with Unicode, and is
not in opposition to, or outside of Unicode. Given
Andrew Bernard andrew.bern...@gmail.com writes:
This is of great interest to me because several of the people I do
scores for (contemporary composers) do not favour the very heavy black
Germanic look of the standard lilypond font, attractive though it may
be. It would be nice to have a wider
Interesting valid points David.
But I was thinking that it although lilypond is open source, why can't I
purchase _commercial_ music fonts to use with it, just as one does for
print typesetting? I did not see the fonts as being tied to buying the
engraving software, but a decoupled market. I
Am 10.08.2013 10:52, schrieb Andrew Bernard:
Interesting valid points David.
But I was thinking that it although lilypond is open source, why can't
I purchase _commercial_ music fonts to use with it, just as one does
for print typesetting? I did not see the fonts as being tied to buying
the
Greetings List,
On 10/08/13 6:57 PM, Urs Liska wrote:
Of course this is all quite complex and difficult.
Which is why this discussion thread is important, I reckon.
One thought:
Of course you can buy commercial fonts and use them with LaTeX.
I use commercial fonts with the open source
Andrew Bernard andrew.bern...@gmail.com writes:
Interesting valid points David.
But I was thinking that it although lilypond is open source, why can't
I purchase _commercial_ music fonts to use with it, just as one does
for print typesetting?
Because they are not standardized. At any rate,
On 10/08/13 7:10 PM, David Kastrup wrote:
Andrew Bernard andrew.bern...@gmail.com writes:
Interesting valid points David.
But I was thinking that it although lilypond is open source, why can't
I purchase _commercial_ music fonts to use with it, just as one does
for print typesetting?
Because
Andrew Bernard andrew.bern...@gmail.com schrieb:
Greetings List,
On 10/08/13 6:57 PM, Urs Liska wrote:
Of course this is all quite complex and difficult.
Which is why this discussion thread is important, I reckon.
One thought:
Of course you can buy commercial fonts and use them with
Andrew Bernard andrew.bern...@gmail.com writes:
On 10/08/13 7:10 PM, David Kastrup wrote:
Of course, people are free to do whatever they want with their own time
and efforts. But if you do it out of a feeling of contributing to
LilyPond, it may be worth looking quite closer before investing
On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 5:46 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Andrew Bernard andrew.bern...@gmail.com writes:
On 10/08/13 7:10 PM, David Kastrup wrote:
Of course, people are free to do whatever they want with their own time
and efforts. But if you do it out of a feeling of
Carl Peterson carlopeter...@gmail.com schrieb:
On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 5:46 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Andrew Bernard andrew.bern...@gmail.com writes:
On 10/08/13 7:10 PM, David Kastrup wrote:
Of course, people are free to do whatever they want with their own
time
and
As a fairly outside observer who is only an occasional user of Lilypond
On 08/09/2013 11:43 PM, Carl Peterson wrote:
The concern I have on SMuFL is that it is an as-of-yet immature standard
without broad support outside of Steinberg. ... Will it be a futile
effort because the SMuFL
Evan Driscoll drisc...@cs.wisc.edu writes:
As a fairly outside observer who is only an occasional user of Lilypond
On 08/09/2013 11:43 PM, Carl Peterson wrote:
The concern I have on SMuFL is that it is an as-of-yet immature standard
without broad support outside of Steinberg. ... Will it
The Paderewski edition of Chopin Nocturne #3 often puts the sustain pedal
markings inside parentheses.
I don't have a scan of it to post here, but the fancy Ped indication
appears directly beneath the note it starts on, but there is an open
parenthesis just to the left of the Ped. The
if you provide an example this will increase your chance of getting an
answer.
--
View this message in context:
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Page-Number-Too-High-tp148969p148971.html
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Andrew Bernard andrew.bern...@gmail.com writes:
Emmentaler is, in effect, proprietary, although free.
I disagree. I think so poorly documented that in practice almost no one
can understand how it works still can't qualify as in effect
proprietary.
It just qualifies as needing a huge amount of
I think so poorly documented that in practice almost no one can
understand how it works still can't qualify as in effect
proprietary.
It is not *that* badly documented. However, the number of people who
understand Metafont are rather small today.
- Someone who doesn't really want to (but
Werner LEMBERG w...@gnu.org writes:
I think so poorly documented that in practice almost no one can
understand how it works still can't qualify as in effect
proprietary.
It is not *that* badly documented. However, the number of people who
understand Metafont are rather small today.
git
18 matches
Mail list logo
