Knut wrote:
> I wonder if adding recommended stylistic alternates to the present
> note glyphs in SMuFL would be a better alternative than creating an
> entirely new parent range, though?
Stylistic sets are really a font-specific (and indeed, font *technology*
specific) solution to the problem, and in general if there are glyphs that
look nominally identical but have different semantics (as is the case for
a number of characters already in SMuFL), then it seems more appropriate
to have a dedicated range for those characters.
Daniel
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Steinberg Media Technologies GmbH, Frankenstrasse 18b, D-20097 Hamburg, Germany
Phone: +49 (40) 21035-0 | Fax: +49 (40) 21035-300 | www.steinberg.net
President: 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
