> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > Additionally, those files are not included in the
> > notation-appendices.itely file.
> >
> > These are severe bugs -- the user can't deduce the correct name for
> > those glyphs if needed for \musicglyph markup command.
>
> what makes you think that they have to be accessed with \musicglyph?
The name \musicglyph itself implies that *any* music glyph can be
accessed, despite of the restriction mentioned in the info pages.
Perhaps some links like
`\musicglyph' GLYPH-NAME (string)
This is converted to a musical symbol, e.g. `\musicglyph
#"accidentals-0"' will select the natural sign from the music
font. See *Note The Feta font: (lilypond/lilypond)The Feta
font. for a complete listing of the possible glyphs.
See the commands \number, \dynamic, ... also for other musical
symbols used in lilypond.
could help to avoid my misunderstanding. BTW, is there any technical
reason why \musicglyph can't handle other fonts? In case there is, I
suggest that \musicglyph emits a warning -- currently, a
non-accessible glyph is silently ignored.
Anyway, it would be very nice to see those fonts somewhere.
Currently, I'm using fontforge to directly view the PFA files which is
not the optimal solution, isn't it?
Werner
_______________________________________________
bug-lilypond mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
