Re: [Patch] Bugfix (Was: Re: Still missing some ancient clefs)

[Juergen Reuter]

On Fri, 30 Aug 2002, Mats Bengtsson wrote:
> ...
> Another question is how to define the mapping from virtual
> font to physical fonts. Isn't there some standard for
> defining virtual fonts in the TeX and/or X11 that we could
> adopt?
>

I just had a quick look on the TeX faq and similar sources for virtual
fonts, see for example:
http://www.tex.ac.uk/cgi-bin/texfaq2html?label=virtualfonts

Since, if I understand correctly, virtual fonts are transparent for TeX,
this probably means that the limit of 128 charcters per font (TeX) still
survives.  (Note that MF itself can handle even more than 256 characters!)

The mapping seems to be some sort of hardwired in-place-substitution, i.e.
you have to a special file for each virtual font.  So also the conceptual
idea itself probably will not fit well on lily (unless you create
thousands of virtual fonts for each of the theoretically possible
combinations of all the style properties of the grobs, or unless you
create seperate fonts according to the 'styled' grobs, i.e. a note head
font, a clef font, etc.).

Greetings,
Juergen