Re: SMuFL Possible mislabeling of U+E56A / U+E56B (Turn / Inverted Turn)

Hello Mathias,

Such issues are usually tracked through the SMuFL's GitHub repo, where they
survive longer than an email thread.

Would you mind posting your report there?
https://github.com/w3c/smufl/issues . There are existing similar cases too,
e.g. https://github.com/w3c/smufl/issues/316

If for some reason you don't plan to submit a GitHub issue, let us know and
I can do it on your behalf.

Best,
Karim


On Thu, Nov 27, 2025 at 5:58 AM Leopold, Matthias <m.leopold@dzblesen.de>
wrote:

> Dear all,
>
>
>
> I would like to report what appears to be a mislabeling in the SMuFL
> definitions of the symbols U+E56A and U+E56B (Turn and Inverted Turn).
>
> According to the current SMuFL documentation:
>
>    - *U+E56A* is labeled “turn”
>    - *U+E56B* is labeled “inverted turn.”
>
> However, in several authoritative historical and theoretical sources, the
> usage is *consistently the opposite*:
> the symbol corresponding to U+E56A is described as an *inverted* turn,
> while the symbol corresponding to U+E56B is the *normal* turn.
>
> For example, in *A Dictionary of Music and Musicians* (Wikisource edition
> at https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/A_Dictionary_of_Music_and_Musicians/Turn),
> the definition is explicit:
>
> “When the order of the notes of a turn is reversed, so as to begin with
> the lower note instead of the upper, the turn is said to be inverted, and
> its sign is either placed on end thus  or drawn down in the contrary
> direction to the ordinary sign, thus .”
> (Example: C. P. E. Bach, Sonata in B♭, Largo.)
>
> This description corresponds to *the symbol currently encoded as U+E56A*,
> not U+E56B.
>
> Other musicological references (and also practical notation manuals)
> confirm this usage.
> Therefore, the SMuFL naming appears to have the two designations
> *reversed*.
>
> Because the naming of glyphs in SMuFL is used by notation software and
> fonts, this inconsistency may lead to incorrect engraving or
> misinterpretation of ornaments, particularly in historical repertoire.
>
> I would therefore kindly ask you to review this issue. From the available
> sources, it seems that *the labels of U+E56A and U+E56B should be swapped*,
> so that the symbols match their historically correct names (“turn” and
> “inverted turn”).
>
> Thank you very much for considering this report.
> Please let me know if further documentation or examples would be helpful.
>
> Kind regards,
> Matthias Leopold
>
> Technical development
>
> *B*raille | *L*arge* P*rint | *E*-Book
>
>
>
> *Deutsches Zentrum für barrierefreies Lesen* *(dzb lesen)*
>
> Gustav-Adolf-Straße 7, 04105 Leipzig
>
> Telefon: 0341 7113-190
>
>
>
>
>