[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: SMuFL name mapping update, 17 March

From: Owen Lamb
Subject: Re: SMuFL name mapping update, 17 March
Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2022 12:52:14 -0700
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.7.0

Hi Benkő,

On 3/19/22 02:00, Benkő Pál wrote:
Hi Owen,

Owen Lamb<>  ezt írta (időpont: 2022. márc. 19., Szo, 7:38):
Hi Benkő,

On 3/17/22 10:05, Benkő Pál wrote:

re the longest rests:
1. a perfect longa rest and a maxima rest are not the same;
2. a perfect longa rest should take three spaces (like current
emmentaler rests.M3mensural), not four (as, I fear, the bravura
mensuralRestLongaPerfecta implies)
3. a maxima rest consists of two (or three) longa rests, similar to
rests.M3neomensural, so much that theoretically one can't tell a
maxima rest from two (three) longa rests.  renaissance version of
multimeasure rests use groups of longa rests at different staff
positions, like

OK. Then I think rests.M3neomensural should be given the SMuFL name 
neomensuralRestMaxima, and shouldn't be an alternate of anything. (It seems 
like a bad idea that both the longa perfecta and the maxima are labeled with 
the M3 duration in LilyPond, when in fact they aren't interchangeable...)
I agree with the naming; I'm confused about potential implications of usage.

What I mean is that LilyPond's current naming system led me to think the maxima 
and longa perfecta rests were interchangeable stylistic variants: they have the 
same nominal duration (M3) and are each exclusive to a particular style 
(mensural or neomensural). I'm only worried that LilyPond's current naming 
scheme might continue to encourage the same error, especially if they are 
switching between the mensural and neomensural styles.

I can't check right now, but I think LilyPond doesn't use longa glyphs
in ligatures: longae are drawn by adding stems to brevis glyphs.

Terminology gets a bit muddled around here. To clarify, are you talking about 
the glyph-on-glyph ligatures found throughout the SMuFL specification, or the 
note-on-note ligatures characteristic of mensural notation?
the latter.  I haven't realized the ambiguity (the existence of
ligatura variants of clefs should have made me think a bit though).

No worries!

I took a look at void Mensural_ligature_engraver::transform_heads (vector<Item *> const &primitives) (line 90, It looks like a longa notehead smob's primitive property (called prim before it's passed into Scheme) does sometimes turn on the MLP_BREVIS flag when descending at the beginning or the end of a ligature, but in all other (non-flexa) cases (see if (general-case), line 279), it turns on the MLP_LONGA flag instead, which always results in a longa glyph when passed into (see Stencil internal_brew_primitive (Grob *me), in particular following int duration_log until the glyph name is generated). So, seems to me we still use for those mid-ligature longae.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]