Arent Storm wrote: >When trying to fit abcusers in a few groups having >[1] abc-sightreaders (without much need for software) >[2] abc-collectors >[3] abc-software-only-users (1st language) >[4] abc-as- interchange-file-format-users (2nd language) > >Two questions arise >- is this a meaningful division? >- if so, how large do we expect the groups to be? > >My answer to the first question is -of course- yes ;-) >The second is the hard one my first (wild)guess would be: > 1: <200 (1%) > 2: <500 (3%) > 3: >1000, <10000 (30%) > 4: >10000 (66%) the remainder >Any thoughts?
It's a reasonable guess. However, we should bear in mind that the numbers don't indicate the importance of the groups. Most of the valuable, creative work is done by members of the first two categories, so it would be a mistake to assume that we don't have to cater for them. Also there is likely to be considerable overlap between the categories. I know of only one sightreader who never uses software, but many people use abc software to process hand-written abc. Likewise many people use conventional music notation software [4] and also publish abc collections[2]. Perhaps the real distinction should be between those who look at (and sometimes edit) the abc source and those who simply use a program to convert it to standard notation or play it. Phil Taylor To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
