Re: Thriple flat/sharp glyphs...

[Torsten Hämmerle]

Hi Abraham,

Thanks for chiming in!



tisimst wrote
> I agree that it should be #x and not x#.

Ok, then this seems to be settled. :)



tisimst wrote
> Can I make a request while you're in the mode? Can we please, please,
> PLEASE, make the double flat look correct?
> [...]

Yes, you can, and you should, that's why I'm asking here on the list before
providing finished a patch.



tisimst wrote
> Maybe I'm the only one who thinks this way. 

Well, we are at least two, but I think your assessment weighs heavily,
you've got a reputation and great expertise when it comes to music fonts,
that's beyond doubt.
My first aim was to create a triple-flat that matches and carries forward
the existing designs (without questioning them, I took them for granted).
If it were up to me, I'd happily change the double-flat glyph (and,
consequently, the triple-flat, too).

*But* this would mean changing a traditional Feta design traded down from
generation to generation (another case would be the controversial treble
clef), and I don't feel empowered to just do it without general consent.

Perhaps you could be so kind as to raise an "official" request (don't know
how exactly such things should be handled). Looking at your gorgeous music
fonts, I think you're entitled to ask this kind of questions.

But what I'll do in any case (no time this evening, but the issue has been
lurking for years) is adapt the multiple-flat-glyphs in my testing lab and
preset this in a PDF file - then everybody can compare old and new versions
directly and we can come to a conclusion.

Until then,
Torsten




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