Am 06.03.2017 um 23:16 schrieb tisimst: > On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 2:34 PM, Noeck [via Lilypond] < > ml-node+s1069038n200797...@n5.nabble.com> wrote: > >> 3. IIUC, this was just a set of overrides and callback functions picking >> up the correct symbols from a smufl font, doing the mapping by glyph >> name. So pretty much all you could do without touching lilypond directly. >> I guess for the GSoC the approach would be quite different and I hope >> Abraham can point into the right direction. >> > Personally, I think there's not much more that can be done with what is > already in OLL, but I don't think that's what we want done anyway. Full > SMuFL integration would be a more substantial improvement, IMHO.
Indeed. We want to make that OLL approach obsolete by not only "supporting" SMuFL natively but by switching completely to *using* it as LilyPond's notation font encoding. Urs > > Best, > Abraham > > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/GSoC-2017-tp200631p200799.html > Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > _______________________________________________ > lilypond-devel mailing list > lilypond-devel@gnu.org > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel -- u...@openlilylib.org https://openlilylib.org http://lilypondblog.org _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
