Reference glyphs of musical accidentals quarter sharp and quarter flat

[Garth Wallace]

And it would pretty odd to call a real symbol a “variation” of one that has
never been in use.

On Wed, Jan 3, 2024 at 1:34 PM Asmus Freytag via Unicode <
unicode at corp.unicode.org> wrote:

> It's not only about whether users know what a variation selector is or is
> not.
>
> Use of a variation selector for two shapes implies that they are the *same
> symbol*. For something like slanted vs. upright integrals, it's easy to
> assert that they are the same symbol and not two symbols that represent the
> same concept. Hence the use of variation selectors.
>
> For other concepts, there are often multiple symbols representing them.
> Pound, for example, is abbreviated with a ligated lb that has it's own
> character code, but also with # on occasion. It would have been exceedingly
> disingenuous to make the lb ligature a variant of the #.
>
> Just because some concepts map 1:1 to symbols it's not a sufficient
> condition for suggesting the use of variation selector. Anytime where
> symbol shapes show significant deviation, the presumption ought to be that
> we are looking at two symbols for the same concept, which both deserve to
> be encoded.
>
> A./
>
> On 1/3/2024 9:11 AM, Doug Ewell via Unicode wrote:
>
> I personally support Kirk Miller's proposal to add the more commonly used
> symbols as separate characters, rather than complicating the encoding by
> adding variation selectors to change the glyph to something quite different.
>
> We don't always realize it, but ordinary users generally don't know
> anything about variation selectors.
>
> —Doug
>
>
> Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra 5G, an AT&T 5G smartphone
> Get Outlook for Android <https://aka.ms/AAb9ysg>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Unicode <unicode-bounces at corp.unicode.org>
> <unicode-bounces at corp.unicode.org> on behalf of Marius Spix via Unicode
> <unicode at corp.unicode.org> <unicode at corp.unicode.org>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, January 3, 2024 9:09:14 AM
> *To:* unicode at corp.unicode.org <unicode at corp.unicode.org>
> <unicode at corp.unicode.org>
> *Subject:* Reference glyphs of musical accidentals quarter sharp and
> quarter flat
>
> Hi,
>
> I just noted that the reference glyphs for
>
> U+1D132 MUSICAL SYMBOL QUARTER TONE SHARP
>
> and
>
> U+1D133 MUSICAL SYMBOL QUARTER TONE FLAT
>
> on the code chart are very unusual. In the standard notation, the
> quarter sharp is represented by U+266F with only one downstroke and the
> quarter flat by a mirrored version of U+266D MUSIC FLAT SIGN (or as a
> variant of U+266D with a stroke). Please find the attached image for
> reference.
>
> I had a look at the mailing list and there was already a suggestion by
> Johnny Farraj in 2015, by Markus Scherer in 2018 and by Gavin Jared Bala
> and Kirk Miller in 2023 (request L2/23-276). The letter also includes
> the currently missing characters for three-quarter sharp and
> three-quarter flat, two characters I also see an urgent need for.
>
> Howerver, in contrast to that request, I propose to unify two suggested
> characters with existing ones and change the reference glyph instead of
> encoding a new character instead.
>
> U+1D1ED MUSICAL SYMBOL REVERSED FLAT (requested) = U+1D133 MUSICAL
> SYMBOL QUARTER TONE FLAT (existing)
> U+1D1EB MUSICAL SYMBOL HALF SHARP (requested) = U+1D133 MUSICAL SYMBOL
> QUARTER TONE FLAT (existing)
>
> The stroked variant of the quarter flat (which does not appear in
> the proposal of Gavin Jared Bala and Kirk Miller, but can be found in
> several pieces) could be obtained by combining U+1D132 MUSICAL SYMBOL
> QUARTER TONE SHARP with a variation selector (e. g. U+FE00).
>
> What do you think?
>
> Best regards,
>
> Marius
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://corp.unicode.org/pipermail/unicode/attachments/20240103/905ed65a/attachment-0001.htm>