[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Tue, 04 Mar 2003 15:40:11 -0700
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i586; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021226 Debian/1.2.1-9
Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
I somewhat agree but the choice of fonts chosen for that document should
be independent of the unicode value used to represent the caesura. I
haven't presently got a better example to show. Maybe someone else
does? I would hope that a better example would be generated in the
fonts used by Lilypond.
Are you sure? That looks more like the symbol used to separate
systems. Do you have a scan of the symbol in action? It's not listed
in Kurt Stone, and Heussenstam gives a handwriting example, that is
more vertically sloped and thinner, like two penlines.
If you look at the end of the standards document above, the
symbol is clearly named ceasura. I'll check the typesetting
books I have at home tonight.
Yes, but the typographical quality of the other symbols in the
document do not convince me. The symbol is much to black and heavy to
put in a staff.
Using "//" actually works thanks to Graham ( Thanks! ) but it would be
better if it actually claimed some horizontal space for itself instead
of just placing itself on top of whatever is there.