About Mark’s last parenthetical point:
> (Maybe this is expecting too much of a mere font. Where should the line be drawn?)
To me, at least, the needs being expressed in this thread (center points in time signatures, formation of chords) begin to cross the line into asking SMuFL to do too much for developers.
I believe our main mission with SMuFL is to support the use of interchangeable fonts by notation applications, with the expectation that these applications will need to programmatically position glyphs to achieve reasonable results using the metadata provided. Regardless of what we do for one edge case or another, this requirement will still exist for many fundamental aspects of conventional Western music notation. If we begin to require all kinds of ligatures and character groups to make the font itself “smarter”, we’ll be creating more and more effort for all future SMuFL font creators, but we won’t be enabling notation applications to go anywhere they couldn’t already go.
Best,
. . . . . ...Joe
Joe Berkovitz
President
Noteflight LLC
Boston, Mass.
phone: +1 978 314 6271
www.noteflight.com
"Your music, everywhere"
#############################################################
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
