Re: Thriple flat/sharp glyphs...

[Torsten Hämmerle]

Urs Liska-3 wrote
> I can't comment on the implementation, but IMHO it looks fine.

Thanks, that's all I wanted to know here on the user list.
The actual implementation isn't perfectly complete anyway (and I'll have to
do a lot of testing because note names and accidentals are terribly basic
stuff...)

Abraham has just sent a reply regarding the glyph double-flat (and,
consequently, new triple-flat) appearance, it starts getting interesting...
:)



Urs Liska-3 wrote
> Why is that so? From the actual height on the page there shouldn't be an 
> issue having it below the dot. Is there a padding or an Y-extent that 
> disturbes?

Just about 3 seconds after pressing the "Post Message" button I asked myself
the same question.
Optically, it shouldn't be a problem to shove the #x under the dot, the
vertical dimensions are according to the # standard, hmmm... 
I'll have a closer look at this (probably tomorrow, at the moment I've just
messed up something and can't compile the documentation anymore...).

All the best,
Torsten





--
Sent from: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/User-f3.html