Re: Cut-outs

Thank you, Daniel, for clarifying this. I have wondered the same thing for
a while now and just thought I was doing something wrong. Good to know that
this is the expected functionality rather than being based off the glyph
origin.

Best,
Abraham

On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 5:01 PM, Daniel Spreadbury <
D.Spreadbury@steinberg.de> wrote:

> Erik wrote:
>
> > Not that it is a big issue, but it just seems a bit curios to me: a lot
> of work has obviously
> > been put into the SMuFL specification and it is generally very
> consistent in glyph registration
> > and how glyphs relate to the font baseline and horizontal origin. Thus
> it is a bit surprising
> > that the cut-outs don’t follow the same logic.
>
> We tried to be pragmatic more than we tried to be consistent, if you see
> what I mean. You're right that most applications would be able to handle
> cut-outs being relative to the glyph origin rather than the bottom
> left-hand corner of the glyph, but we chose that approach based on
> community discussion and the sense that the glyph bbox would be easier to
> get hold of in a wider variety of APIs, and my personal feeling is that
> there's not enough to gain by proposing changing this now, though perhaps
> to date the only application to have actually implemented the use of
> cut-outs to any great degree is Dorico, so it might not inconvenience a
> huge number of implementers. (It would inconvenience us, though!)
>
> So I think we should leave things as they are, but if you strongly feel
> that the community should consider a change in this area, please do raise
> an issue at https://www.github.com/w3c/smufl/issues/and we can discuss it
> for the future.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Daniel
>
>
>
> From:        Erik Ronström <erik@ompom.se>
> To:        Daniel Spreadbury <D.Spreadbury@steinberg.de>
> Cc:        public-music-notation-contrib@w3.org
> Date:        09/04/2018 13:21
> Subject:        Re: Cut-outs
> ------------------------------
>
>
>
> > We use the glyph bounding box because it is typically simple to get hold
> of in whatever API you might be using to gather information about the
> glyph. Not all APIs seem to provide more detailed access to glyph metrics,
> whereas the bounding box appears to be pretty universally available.
>
> I see, but wouldn’t the glyph origin be even simpler to ”get hold of”,
> always being [0, 0]? :)
>
> Not that it is a big issue, but it just seems a bit curios to me: a lot of
> work has obviously been put into the SMuFL specification and it is
> generally very consistent in glyph registration and how glyphs relate to
> the font baseline and horizontal origin. Thus it is a bit surprising that
> the cut-outs don’t follow the same logic.
>
> Erik
>
>
>
>
>
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>
> Phone: +49 (40) 21035-0 | Fax: +49 (40) 21035-300 | www.steinberg.net
>
> President: Andreas Stelling | Managing Director: Thomas Schöpe, Yoshiyuki
> Tsugawa
>
> Registration Court: Hamburg HRB 86534
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>