|
On 30/11/13 21:38, Joseph Rushton
Wakeling wrote:
On
30/11/13 00:03, Janek Warchoł wrote:
2013/11/29 David Kastrup
<address@hidden>:
Why not use the Unicode charpoints, like
B♭, F♯ and so on? They are
_supposed_ to go well with the text font and kern properly.
because *we* have the most beautiful musical font in the world?
;-)
I've looked at the output of
\markup { B♭ F♯ }
and it is *hideous* (see attached). Totally unusable.
But if you go with text + Lilypond accidental glyphs, you have the
challenge that the optimal combination will vary depending on the
text font. Not all of us stick with the default, you know :-)
That said, I agree with you that the use of these combinations of
Unicode glyphs does not seem to work well (I tried out a few
different fonts in LibreOffice just to compare and contrast; uck).
I've used markup like the below a few times. Looks acceptable with
the default font:
\markup\concat { "Sextet
in B" \raise #0.35 { \tiny\flat } ", Op 18" }
I agree that the unicode flat symbol is not a good match for the
rest of the text when used here.
Nick
|