> It seems to me that if you are going to use SMuFL fonts, you're
> either going to have to completely rewrite every lilypond glyph-name
> lookup (which should probably be phase 3 of the project) or you're
> going to have to have a lilypond-glyph-name-to-smufl-code-point
> lookup.
To decide whether LilyPond completely abandons the current glyph names
by replacing them with the SMuFL mnemonics is something the LilyPond
community has to decide. Using `convert-ly`, this could be easily
done. However, I don't know whether this makes sense.
> It seems to me like you'll want to have a lilypond-glyph-name to
> smufl-glyph-name table created anyway, because you're going to have
> to make the changes to smufl-glyph-name in the code (or else
> hardcode the code points, but you seem to think they are possible to
> change, so we shouldn't do that).
No, they don't change. SMuFL might deprecate code points in favour of
new solutions, but no code points get removed.
Werner
