----- Original Message -----
From: "Janek Warchoł" <lemniskata.bernoull...@gmail.com>
To: "Phil Holmes" <m...@philholmes.net>
Cc: <lilypond-devel@gnu.org>
Sent: Friday, March 18, 2011 1:01 PM
Subject: Re: shortened flags affair, part 7 - downstem full-length 64th and
128th flags
2011/3/18 Phil Holmes <m...@philholmes.net>:
> Janek,
>
> I prefer the newer ones,
Glad to hear this!
> although I doubt I'll use them too often in real music!
> Me too :)
> However, I was looking at my Gardner Read and think that, strictly, all
> the
> flag shapes are a little wrong according to his "rules". The quaver flag
> is
> too short, and the shorter note flags don't join the stem properly. To
> be
> honest I'm not too bothered, but wondered what other people think.
> Please
> see the attached scan from his book, which is a few excerpts from pages
> stuck together.
Thanks for providing this example.
In my opinion it's a matter of taste and font design. Read describes
how the flags that he is "used to" look, but i'd say that we are free
to make our own design decisions, as long as they are consistent and
don't look too strange.
I prefer our Feta font.
thanks,
Janek
In general I do agree with your approach of making our own decisions based
on what's published, rather than just following it. However, I do think the
current flags are inconsistent if you compare the up-stem quaver with the
semi-quaver. The quaver's flag stops at the top of the notehead, whereas
the semi-quaver (and all the shorter notes) runs down to the middle of the
notehead or below. I think it might be better if the quaver's flag was
about 1/2 a space longer?
--
Phil Holmes
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel