[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Metafont optional parameters
From: |
Carl Sorensen |
Subject: |
Re: Metafont optional parameters |
Date: |
Mon, 1 Jun 2020 18:48:34 +0000 |
User-agent: |
Microsoft-MacOutlook/10.10.16.200509 |
You’re correct, of course.
Encodingdefs.ps assigns ps glyph ids, not Unicode encoding.
It’s been long enough since I worked on this that I’m apparently fuzzy.
Sorry for the noise.
Carl
From: Owen Lamb <owendlamb@gmail.com>
Date: Monday, June 1, 2020 at 12:17 PM
To: Carl Sorensen <carl.d.sorensen@gmail.com>
Cc: Werner LEMBERG <wl@gnu.org>, "lilypond-devel@gnu.org"
<lilypond-devel@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: Metafont optional parameters
Hi Carl,
Thanks for bringing this file to my attention. It seems to me, however, that
the Unicode encoding is defined in
gen-emmentaler.fontforge.py<http://gen-emmentaler.fontforge.py>, at lines 58
through 61, with a simple iterator starting at 0xE000. (This is what I'm
planning to replace with manually defined SMuFL codepoints, taken from the .mf
files.)
AFAICT, encodingdefs.ps<http://encodingdefs.ps> doesn't seem to have a bearing
on the final Unicode encoding. The first glyph mentioned in
encodingdefs.ps<http://encodingdefs.ps> ("noteheads.d0doFunk"), there given the
value 0x01 in the LilyNoteHeadEncoding list, has a value of 0xE0F5 in the
generated emmentaler fonts, and is nowhere near being the lowest-value notehead
character in the PUA. Perhaps encodingdefs.ps<http://encodingdefs.ps> deals
with a different, font-specific, category-dependent character map, while the
python script defines the Unicode encoding?
Thanks,
Owen
On Sat, May 30, 2020 at 7:07 PM Carl Sorensen
<carl.d.sorensen@gmail.com<mailto:carl.d.sorensen@gmail.com>> wrote:
On Sat, May 30, 2020 at 4:41 PM Owen Lamb
<owendlamb@gmail.com<mailto:owendlamb@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I'd like to add an optional parameter for smuflcode to fet_beginchar, so
> that I don't have to take two lines redeclaring the variable in every
> glyph. Ideally, it won't have to be optional once every character has it,
> but in the meantime, it would help with testing individual characters' new
> encodings.
I thought that the font encodings were created in the process of
converting to Type 1 fonts by postscript using the information in
ps/encodingdefs.ps<http://encodingdefs.ps>
Is that the case?
Carl