Hello Werner, Thanks for the clarification!
JM > Le 13 juil. 2022 à 16:40, Werner LEMBERG <w...@gnu.org> a écrit : > > >>> In MusixXML, this sign is <spiccato/> (The <spiccato/> element | >>> MusicXML 4.0 (w3.org) >>> <https://www.w3.org/2021/06/musicxml40/musicxml-reference/elements/spiccato/>), >>> the same sign is named \staccatissimo in Lilypond. >>> In MusixXML, <staccatissimo/> looks like this: (The <staccatissimo> >>> element | MusicXML 4.0 (w3.org) >>> <https://www.w3.org/2021/06/musicxml40/musicxml-reference/elements/staccatissimo/>), >>> but it seems there is no corresponding articulation in Lilypond and no >>> glyph in the Emmentaler font. >>> >>> So the question is: is there interest among the LilyPond community to >>> add the latter glyph in some way? > > I consider the distinction between these two glyphs completely > arbitrary. At normal size, the difference between a concave and a > convex top is not really visible. > > If you look at > > https://w3c.github.io/smufl/latest/tables/articulation.html > > you can see that both glyph shapes in question are defined as variants > of 'staccatissimo' – for spiccato, there doesn't exist a symbol. And > rightly so: I've never seen a symbol for spiccato except an ordinary > staccato point with the word 'spicc.' (if at all). > > > Werner
