2013/4/23 David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org>: > Janek Warchoł <janek.lilyp...@gmail.com> writes: > >> 2013/4/23 David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org>: >>> But what word are we spreading? "Can it work with our existing >>> scores and data, possibly through MusicXML?" "No, but if it could, >>> it would likely be the best at it." >> >> yeah, that's bad. But it's not like Lily has only "potential" >> capabilities: scores can be done using it, with good results. > > Sure. But interoperability is not something we can truthfully advertise > as a capability when nobody is working on it or even planning to work on > it. Not even when we have full agreement that it would be nice.
yes. >> Bottom line: i'd also like the situation to be better before starting >> serious "adverstising". But if we wait too long, we won't arrive at >> anything. > > We won't arrive at anything by advertising, either. Particularly not by > focusing our advertising on the things we are bad at and painting them > in a wrong light. That's just a recipe for a disappointed user base. Agreed - we should advertise things we're good at. >> In other words: if we practice too long, we'll miss the performance. > > I am more worried about us practicing other instruments and pieces than > on the concert announcements. agreed. let's just change concert announcements and get back to work ;) best, Janek _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
