> 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