> I believe the main issues concerning the use of OpenType features have been resolved to the satisfaction of the community: no SMuFL-compliant font will be compelled to use OpenType features such as ligatures or stylistic alternates, since the recommendation will be to explicitly encode any such alternative characters at codepoints drawn from a pool of codepoints set aside for the purpose, at the discretion of each font developer.
I would suggest that if some characters are clearly ligatures, it should
be recommended that they are to be defined as OpenType ligatures,
despite assigning them codepoints. Dynamic letters are the example. I
think it is reasonable to have an mp-glyph defined both at explicit
codepoint, as well as a ligature, so application developers can choose
the way these symbols are handled, and font developers are assured, that
if they draw an mp ligature, it will be used in applications that use
single glyphs for dynamics as well as in the ones that compose dynamics
from single letters (at least if they do not rely on Uniscribe).
Ornaments are the other similar case. If SMuFL aims to be a superset of
Unicode Musical Symbols range, then some of ornaments should be
obligatory defined as ligatures of the ornament strokes, as they are
currently encoded in Unicode.
--
Emil Wojtacki
#############################################################
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
