> The SMuFL standard is just a specification cooked up by Steinberg
> for the new program. It's been possible for them to consider this
> since they are architecting the program from scratch. But it's a
> step away and outside of the hugely important work the Unicode
> Consortium have been doing for decades.
I disagree, and I think that you are completely missing the purpose of
SMuFL: It collects *glyphs* which are used somewhere, and which people
need somehow. Compare this to the Adobe Glyph Collections like
`Adobe-Korea1-2' or `Adobe-GB1-5'. As they write on smufl.org:
The goal of SMuFL is to establish a new standard glyph mapping for
musical symbols that is optimised for OpenType fonts and that can be
adopted by a variety of software vendors and font designers, for the
benefit of all users of music notation software.
Unicode is a *character* standard, mainly to *exchange* information.
It is *not* related to glyphs, or to fonts. The SMuFL team correctly
maps the glyphs to the Private Area of Unicode, and they don't suggest
the inclusion of any of those entities into the Unicode standard.
Whether SmuFL is centered on Steinberg's new program is basically
completely irrelevant. I'm quite sure that they are willing to add
glyphs which Lilypond needs and which aren't covered yet. Not that
this is really necessary, as far as I can see...
Werner
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
