Hi George,
Yes, Mark has incorporated MusicXML needs into his extended font. His
suggestions on the SMuFL list cover most of what is missing from SMuFL 0.4
that is present in MusicXML 3.0. There's also support for 1024th notes and
rests: an outlier, but still found in repertoire of the common practice
period. I still owe Daniel a list of font characters to fill MusicXML 3.0
gaps, and hope to be able to send that soon.
The next step would come with adding support in a future version of
MusicXML to fill that SMuFL gaps for common Western music notation. One
thing that will help there is if each character in SMuFL has a distinct
semantic label. Daniel's already mentioned the need for this in other
discussions, but there are still some characters like ornaments where this
hasn't yet happened. There's no one perfect name as meanings change for
symbols over time, composer, and geography, but an adequate distinct name
is better than a more general name that duplicates others. This is true
both for learning what SMuFL fonts do, and for referencing SMuFL in other
places such as MusicXML.
I'm copying the MusicXML list on this since it's relevant to both groups,
though it's a reply to a discussion on the SMuFL list.
Best regards,
Michael Good
MakeMusic, Inc.
>On 6/5/13 9:26 AM, "George Litterst" <
[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>>In addition, I would like to express the opinion that I hope that Mark's
>>colleague at MakeMusic, Michael Good, is working closely with him so
>>that the font issues and MusicXML issues are being resolved in a
>>cooperative manner.
#############################################################
This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to
the mailing list <
[hidden email]>.
To unsubscribe, E-mail to: <
[hidden email]>
To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to <
[hidden email]>
To switch to the INDEX mode, E-mail to <
[hidden email]>
Send administrative queries to <
[hidden email]>
Locked
