On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 10:53 PM, Hilary Snaden <h...@newearth.demon.co.uk> wrote: > On 2013-02-21 19:58, Urs Liska wrote: >> >> http://blog.steinberg.net/2013/02/welcome/ > > > These from Daniel Spreadbury tell me most, I think, of what I need to know > about the new project. > > "Our application will use a proprietary file format... an open source file > format is only any use if you also have a wide range of software that can > make use of that format... the Lilypond file format itself does not describe > exactly how the finished score will appear..." > > Thanks, but no thanks.
I just blogged about this: http://blog.adamspiers.org/2013/02/25/music-industry-learns-nothing-from-the-avid-sibelius-saga/ Like it or not (and I certainly don't), a large proportion of people who need to notate music will run away screaming if you explain the compilation-based design of LilyPond to them. I think http://lilypond.org/text-input.html is absolutely fantastic, but some people's aversion to anything which looks at all technical seems unsurmountable to me (although I'd love to be proven wrong; after all, I still see "non-technical" airport staff happily typing cryptic commands into old-school terminals in order to query flight data ...) So anything we can do as a community to address that part of the user-base is very good in my book ... _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
