Hello, thanks for the reply. On Thu, 2003-02-27 at 09:18, Guido Amoruso wrote: > On Wed, 2003-02-26 at 18:10, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Hi, > > > Is there any chance Lilypond will ever be able to take MusicXML as > > input? How hard would it be, and how would it fit into lilypond's > > architecture? > I've written a MusicXML to Lilypond converter, it is at http://www.nongnu.org/xml2ly.
I'm sure you've put a lot of thought and effort into this converter, but my feeling is that as long as this kind of transcoding is external to lily, MusicXML users will be second-class citizens. Some things will work, some things won't. Perhaps an unspoken part of my question was "do the lilypond developers care to support this format?" Really supporting the format would mean more than finding the closest mudela equivalent for every MusicXML directive. > On the other hand, if you mean MusicXML as a direct input to Lilypond, > I can't tell you much, but read http://www.lilypond.org/wiki/?XmlInput I wonder if HanWen still holds this opinion now that MusicXML is out there and maturing. It may be that lilypond had no use for XML when there was no published schema for interchange of music. But now there is and it seems to be a well-designed one at that. It seems that supporting this format would benefit everyone involved. Lilypond would become more useful since it would be capable of reading a widespread interchange format. Score authors would not have to lock themselves into a format that is only readable by one program. Maybe it's not the right direction for lily, but I'm surprised there hasn't at least been more discussion about it. I'm also surprised that my message was bounced to -user when it asked the question "how would this fit into lily's architecture?" I guess I am to take this to mean "it fits into lily's architecture by not being a part of lily." Josh _______________________________________________ Lilypond-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
