> > 3. do you think it is possible to use GPL fonts in a proprietary
> > product? I mean, any modification to the fonts should be GPLed, but
> > perhaps that would not regard the whole application.
>
> Yes, using fonts is allowed, as long as changes to the font are
> redistributed in source form.
>
c:6.9.no7 -> c e g a d (experimental)
For a proof sheet of the new chord-name parsing, with examples given below
the staff, see
http://members.rogers.com/rerdavies/new-chord-names.ps
(note that the chord name display requires a lot of work, but the notes on
the staff are correct).
If
I've been quietly mulling over how to undertake a rewrite for the chord name
generation for a while. Along the way I've run into a number of nightmare
chords (C:5+.5-.9+.9-, for example), and a number of chord-writing
conventions that really challenge the current approach being taken for
chords in
Do I have access to font metrics from within lilypond scheme code? Typeface
or numeric ascender height or extent of numbers would be particularly
useful.
I ask because I'm wondering how easy it would be to do ascender alignment in
a typeface-safe way for some of the chord-name notation cases that
> You state "dim/Ø" - but I don't think that ANYBODY conciders dim and Ø
> the same chord: Ø is by everybody I know concidered a half-diminished
> seventh, and dim is not. (correct me if I'm wrong).
Ooops. Yes. Of course. Careless mistake.
> The entire question about when to use superscript hasn
I see chords are still broken in places in 1.5.55. (13th chords in the Jazz
style spouting out random little bits of nastiness, for example, accidentals
on the chord names not raised properly due to someone overwriting
simple-super somewhere, &c).
Is anyone looking at this? Would anyone mind if I
