Am 17.04.2015 um 16:05 schrieb Kieren MacMillan:
Hi Urs,
First off, thank you so much for your continuing efforts on behalf of Lilypond.
They are really important, and no doubt time- and energy-consuming for you,
with little promise of immediate benefit to you personally. The ‘Pond
appreciates you!
"why should a publishing house use LilyPond?”
We might start by asking the question “Why should *any* person use Lilypond?”,
and then scale up from there.
Well, this seems a good idea, but not for my original question. I think,
this is to some extent what I already have, but the different question
here is "why should anybody who already has existing workflows and
infrastructure *switch* to LilyPond?"
If you could find the time to put together a list of arguments (or maybe
a nice blog post) why a *composer* should use LilyPond this would also
be very helpful. I have had discussions with various composers whom I
couldn't really convince of the usefulness of giving it a try.
For this kind of people it seems most important to get their music into
the score as quickly and easily as possible. I'm thinking of composers
who *do* need performance material but who do not necessarily need
publication quality, just the one necessary for people to play from the
material.
...
most publishing houses don't really care anymore about the editorial process,
and they have the impression that this could actually create more overhead than
they have currently
We might want to tailor a few “pitches” — complete with working demonstrations
— to present to organizations with different needs. For example, a
quick-and-dirty translation which (e.g.) took a Finale source filie and turned
it [first via MusicXML, probably] into a Henle-lookalike Lilypond file in under
5 minutes would be VERY compelling to certain people, and they wouldn’t want to
see (or even care about) edition management, ScholarLY, etc. Then a second
(likely longer) demo would be available for those working on critical editions.
And so on.
Sounds reasonable.
I think I've identified (or was told) the following use cases:
- producing scores "for the day" - editions without specialized demands
and not necessarily intended for extra-long maintainment.
- producing scores on short notice, e.g. performance material when the
composer delivers too late
- process existing material (either from the archives or from
heterogenous contributors' systems)
- scholarly editions and edition series with a long-term horizon.
Urs
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
