On 07/24/2014 01:08 AM, Alexander Kobel wrote:
https://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=4014 ?
On the other hand, I actually don't know if it is correct when
I say: "the Pango description string for the font, which is passed as-is
to the Pango interface". Is this Pango? Is it fontconfig? Is it
correct that `fc-match <string>` will tell me what
`(make-expert-font-tree '((... <string>)) ...)' will do, or almost, but
not quite? I'm kinda lost there myself.
Oh, and I forgot one:
Is it an expected and supported behaviour that I'm "allowed" to
advertise that you can introduce new lily-family symbols ('markup and
'condensed in the example, but I could think of, e.g., 'lyrics, 'header,
'chords or 'mark to be useful)? Or is it rather an unexpected feature
(aka. bug) that might vanish at some point? I assume that it's safe to
use, but I'm not sure.
And if yes, should we also implement a mapping between "logical" and
"physical" lily-families (similar to structural markup vs. direct markup
in Latex or HTML)? Like, per default,
'lyrics -> 'roman
'header -> 'roman
'chords -> 'sans
'url -> 'typewriter
and the user may add a 'condensed family and re-map 'lyrics to
'condensed. Or is this overkill, and we should stick to the one-layer
strategy we already have?
Best,
Alexander
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
