Re: Caesura, n-th time :)

[Werner LEMBERG]

> The first one is a stab at a new caesura glyph that has continuously
> been requested on this list, according to the archives.

Is there any reason why you are replacing the old glyph shape instead
of adding a new one?

> The only problem seemed to be that the corners didn't look very
> symmetrical (which by the way is also the case with the existing
> "noteheads.s[012]slash" glyphs).

Regarding `noteheads.s[012]slash', this is not true.  If you use
mf2pt1 to generate the feta fonts you can see that.  I rather suspect
an artifact of the current glyph generation with mftrace.


    Werner