On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 2:05 PM, "Dieter Glötzel" <d.gloet...@web.de> wrote: > Recently I made some experimentation with SmartEye, which is an excellent > scanner and interpreter for notes. > It produces besides its own music format and midi either NIFF od MusicXML > output. > If I now want to work with PMX on scanned notes, > then it would be great to be able to import any of these formats into PMX. > > What do you think?
Yes, I agree that it would be convenient to convert a specific *output* format like MusicXML to a convenient *input* format. But this doesn't justify a system for all conceivable interconversions. Bob >> We need something which can read PMX, M-Tx or ABC; convert it to >> a central structure; from that central structure write PMX, M-Tx, >> ABC, MusiXTeX, Lilypond, MIDI, etc. > > Do we? Yes, there are several "text-based" formats for describing > music (MusiXTeX, PMX, M-Tx, ABC, PMW, LY, ... ). But why would > anyone need to *inter-convert* these unless they were abandoning a > format and needed to convert "legacy" files to another format? > > Pandoc is needed because there are often imposed requirements for > "intermediate" formats; for example, documentation sources must > be in a specific format or a pointy-headed boss insists on .doc > format. But for us, there are rarely such requirements; we are just > producing music scores (and parts) and midis; once we've learned > a suitable input language, there's no reason routinely to convert > descriptions to another. ------------------------------- TeX-music@tug.org mailing list If you want to unsubscribe or look at the archives, go to http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/tex-music
