Re: Using Unicode symbols for accidentals

[Pavel Roskin]

Quoting Carl Sorensen <address@hidden>:

> I think the point Werner was making is that accidentals are used on a
> staff.  The graphical representation of f sharp is a notehead on the f
> line or space (depending on which staff, and which octave) with a sharp
> symbol either before the note (an accidental) or in the key signature.
>
> The text representation of f sharp in germany and austria is fis.  When
> you want to describe a note in text, that's how you do it.  In english, we
> write "f sharp"; in german, they write "fis".

I understand that.

> > Using those signs in a text file would be a new thing.  Maybe
> > accidentals should be written before the notes, as in the score (♯f),
> > but that could complicate parsing and conversion to the new format.  On
> > the other hand, it would be better to make a choice that's more natural
> > for musicians, not for programmers.
>
> For german musicians, fis is more natural.
>
> Personally, I would *hate* having to type unicode symbols for sharp and
> flat. It's much easier to learn that is means sharp and es means flat,
> than it is to learn (and remember) how to get unicode characters in my
> text file.  I can type text at 70 words per minute.  I can type unicode at
> about 0.2 words per minute.

It should be possible to convert is/es to Unicode symbols with a  
script or in a GUI such as Frescobaldi.

> If learning that "is" means "sharp" and "es" means "flat" is going to stop
> someone from using LilyPond, I have no confidence that they will ever use
> it anyway.  They should probably use some GUI point-and-click tool, rather
> than LilyPond.

That's not my goal at all.  I want just want compact input that would  
be easy on the eye.  "fis" looks three times wider than "f".  And it  
would be hard to separate it from other notes if chords were written  
without spaces ("dfisa").

> I believe that someone who wanted to (including you) could define a
> language, e.g. unicode, that used unicode symbols for entry of
> alterations.  It should be relatively straightforward, by adding entries
> to the file scm/define-note-names.scm.  If you'd like to try it, I'd
> certainly be willing to help you through rough spots that you hit.  And if
> you have a unicode language, then we can have the discussion about making
> it the default language for LilyPond, although I doubt there is any chance
> of moving it to the default.
>
> One of the nice things about LilyPond is that if you want a feature, you
> can implement it.  So let me encourage you to give it a try!

I understand now that I wanted to do two different things.

1) Unlock the possibilities of using musical symbols defined in  
Unicode to create more compact and readable input files.

2) Have universal notation for sharps and flats that would be accepted  
with any language settings.

Judging by the feedback so far, it looks like the advanced Unicode  
symbols may be a poor choice for the universal notation.

A special "Unicode language" could be a stepping stone towards the  
first goal.  I'll try to implement that if I have time.

--
Regards,
Pavel Roskin