>> Please test the attached patch.
>
> Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that a critical issue regarding
> the usability of our PDF files?
It's not critical, AFAIK. In PDF files, only the `emmentaler'
OpenType fonts are used, and we don't refer to any subfont. Missing
glyphs would be critical,
2013/12/1 David Kastrup
> Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that a critical issue regarding the
> usability of our PDF files? Why has this not been entered into the
> tracker?
>
just added: https://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=3695
___
Werner LEMBERG writes:
>> Now, for recent versions of emmentaler (same font file), LILC contains:
>> (subfont . "feta20")
>> (subfont . "feta-alphabet20")
>> (subfont . "feta-flags20")
>> (subfont . "feta-noteheads20")
>> (subfont . "parmesan20")
>> (subfont . "parmesan-noteheads20")
Tobias Hoffmann writes:
> Nevertheless I tried your patch as far as possible and it produces the
> following emmentaler-20.subfonts file (fontforge compiles this as-is
> into the LILF table), which LGTM:
>feta20 feta-noteheads20 feta-flags20 parmesan20
> parmesan-noteheads20 feta-alphabet20
>
On 28/11/13 12:48, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
Now, for recent versions of emmentaler (same font file), LILC contains:
(subfont . "feta20")
(subfont . "feta-alphabet20")
(subfont . "feta-flags20")
(subfont . "feta-noteheads20")
(subfont . "parmesan20")
(subfont . "parmesan-noteheads20
> Now, for recent versions of emmentaler (same font file), LILC contains:
> (subfont . "feta20")
> (subfont . "feta-alphabet20")
> (subfont . "feta-flags20")
> (subfont . "feta-noteheads20")
> (subfont . "parmesan20")
> (subfont . "parmesan-noteheads20")
>
> [...]
>
> but the subfonts
I'm reading the LILF table to get the available subfonts, e.g.,
feta20 parmesan20 feta-alphabet20
Now, for recent versions of emmentaler (same font file), LILC contains:
(subfont . "feta20")
(subfont . "feta-alphabet20")
(subfont . "feta-flags20")
(subfont . "feta-noteheads20")
(subfon
