On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 1:16 AM, <m...@apollinemike.com> wrote: > I know I'm rehashing old ground, but I think that these projects stand to > mutually benefit from each other if and only if they evolve in "natural" > directions given their goals. ... In general, the idea of LilyPond is to > build a master engraver - a virtual person who, using various directives, > creates a score following hundreds of years of engraving knowledge.
There's a lot of wisdom in your comment, Mike. I agree that the best thing would be for Musecore and Lilypond to define themselves in complementary ways. David, given the idea that the soul of Lilypond is engraving, I don't know if having musescore import Lilypond syntax is absolutely necessary or even absolutely possible. For them to do that would require using Lilypond as a library and constantly updating the import routines. The insane and incredible richness of Lilypond makes a 1-1 translation nearly impossible, so Musescore would have to support only a subset of Lilypond features. Not that I mean to convince you to invest spare time you don't have into musescore integration - apologies if I give that impression. _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
