[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Supporting ♯ and ♭
From: |
Noeck |
Subject: |
Re: Supporting ♯ and ♭ |
Date: |
Mon, 06 Oct 2014 23:58:29 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.1.2 |
Am 06.10.2014 um 22:58 schrieb Owain Sutton:
>> IMO opinion using these unicode symbols for sharps and flats is an
>> interesting idea - but I personally will probably never use it.
>
> I agree, it's likely to remain a niche option. I don't see that as a reason
> for
> not including it though, and as for double-sharps, is "c♯♯" more problematic
> than "cciscis"?
That’s a bit exaggerated. It is cisis in Dutch and German etc. And
that’s just how you would call that note in these languages. So that’s a
very natural choice.
Back to the ♯ and ♭: I would also say: Why not integrate this into
lilypond (even though I would not use it because I want to use the keys
on my keyboard). In that case the double sharps should be done the same way:
𝄪 (U+1D12A) and
𝄫 (U+1D12B)
Cheers,
Joram
- Re: Supporting ♯ and ♭, (continued)
- Re: Supporting ♯ and ♭, Hans Aberg, 2014/10/06
- Re: Supporting ♯ and ♭, Simon Albrecht, 2014/10/06
- Re: Supporting ♯ and ♭, MarcM, 2014/10/06
- Re: Supporting ♯ and ♭, Janek Warchoł, 2014/10/06
- Re: Supporting ♯ and ♭, Robert Schmaus, 2014/10/06
- Re: Supporting ♯ and ♭, Martin Tarenskeen, 2014/10/06
- Re: Supporting ♯ and ♭, David Bellows, 2014/10/06
- Re: Supporting ♯ and ♭, Owain Sutton, 2014/10/06
- Re: Supporting ♯ and ♭,
Noeck <=
- Re: Supporting ♯ and ♭, Owain Sutton, 2014/10/06
- Re: Supporting ♯ and ♭, MarcM, 2014/10/06
- Re: Re: Supporting ♯ and ♭, Noeck, 2014/10/07
- Re: Supporting ♯ and ♭, Richard Shann, 2014/10/07
Re: Supporting ♯ and ♭, Tim Roberts, 2014/10/06
Re: Supporting ♯ and ♭, MING TSANG, 2014/10/06