My gut reaction would be no. Since you have been musing:
what would be arguments in favour of such a promotion?
Alex
Sent: Tuesday, April 28, 2015 4:22 PM
Subject: [smufl-discuss] Should straight flags be promoted to
recommended characters?
Dear SMuFLers,
Something I have been musing about
recently, and I would like to ask the
community for its wisdom.
At
present, the 'Flags' range (
http://www.smufl.org/version/latest/range/flags/)
specifies up- and
down-stem versions of note flags for rhythmic durations
from 8th down to
1024th. The specification suggests optional glyphs
including shortened
versions of these glyphs for avoiding rhythm dots (on
unbeamed, dotted
notes), and also straight flags.
Straight flags are
used in works by 20th century composers such as Berio
and Boulez, both of
whom happen to be published by Universal Edition.
There is not much (if any)
discussion of straight flags in Read, Stone, or
indeed Gould.
My
question to the community is this: should straight flags be promoted
from
their current status as recommended optional glyphs to the higher
status of
recommended characters?
Thanks,
Daniel
- - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Steinberg Media Technologies GmbH,
Frankenstrasse 18b, D-20097 Hamburg, Germany
Phone: +49 (40) 21035-0 | Fax:
+49 (40) 21035-300 |
www.steinberg.netPresident: Andreas
Stelling | Managing Director: Hiroshi Sasaki, Hirofumi Osawa
Registration
Court: Hamburg HRB 86534
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-
#############################################################
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
