----- Original Message ----- From: "Frank Nordberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2001 11:39 AM Subject: Re: [abcusers] mailing list abusers
> No, Jack, you would not be correct in assuming so. Or at least that is > not an issue in this particular sad case. > I know all the combattants well enough to assure you that they are all > earnest in their interest in and support of the ABC standard. > > But there are a few people here who definitely lack the social skills > needed to participate in a civil, constructive discussion. And I'm > talking about more than one person here. > Yes, Gianni *was* way out of line, but it's not as if he was very > lonesome there... > > Anyway, the harm is done now, and I don't think it's possible to repair > the damage. We just have to try to put it behind us and move on. I've been off line for a few days while on holidays, and I am just reading back to quite a few messages. Nice on your part admitting I was'nt very lomesone here! No, seriously, I wouldn't really be upsetted by people choosing to filter my messages - at least those that did seem inclined to are among those people whose message I usually in turn avoid reading ;-)! Also, I don't feel guilty for having being offensive, since I did it in replying to people that had been gratuitely offensive in their postings. Along the years I've usually avoided both what you call "attack anybody personally" and "answering an insult with an insult", yet you can't keep on smiling at those who are shooting at you your whole life... Anyway, I suppose as far as this list is concerned, is the first of your tips that should be kept in mind. Actually - and that really upsetted me -, I've been challenged on a number of grounds I'de never entered, of for statements I never made an ugly number of times. In fact I've tried to make one single point along the years, and it was a very simple one: an update of the standard was needed, in first place, for the sake of the future of the notation. I've never pressed for the inclusion of a particul feature, nor for any particular syntachtical choice... as far as new features were made part of the standard, I would have been satisfied. The obvious reason of interest toward the abc notation was for me - and for a large majority of the users who, like me, aren't developers - that it could be used an easy to handle human readable exchange format. Yet, as far as the standard is concerned, we are talking about potentialities, since really one line of music on one staff in the key of G and an almost total lack of decorations isn't really much useful. And I dare say a number of the developers in this list suffered from these limitations as well, since in fact the number of native softwares/clones that have been written, to start with abc2ps, have been adding more and more non standard extensions to offer new features. It's a pity none of them has been made part of the standard, and a number have in fact been implemented in different ways in the single packages, creating even more incompatibilities that those that had naturally arisen from the different interpretation of the ambiguities and inconcistensies of the standard itself. The reason that made an update of the standard impossible (even if there a draft that nobody seems to care about) is clear: the incapacity of the developers in this mailing list to cooperate toward a common goal and to agree virtually about anything. Now, it's plain to see that the developers in this list are not just a minority of the users, but a minority of the abc related software developers as well - as in fact the excellent list of software packages you mantain on your site easily demonstrates! Of course nobody with an ounce of common sense might discususs the right of the afore mentioned developers to choose the features they wish to implement in their packages, yet the update of the standard is a matter that should involve the whole community of the users, and in making such an update impossible those developers have damaged those who might have chosen to use other software packages - for instance some of the excellent notation shareware that "speak abc", which are in fact the standard I judge the abc native softwares against, and that has brough me to state that, with a couple of exceptions, they aren't worth in comparison the effort needed to download them (yes, I know this hurted a few people, yet...). Anyway, arguing over and over about matters of evidence with people who pretend they can't see them isn't a likely pastime for anybody. An exchange format, to be useful, must be flexible (i.e. offer the chance to code a wide number of informations), and at the same time must be, as far as possible, ambiguities free (i.e. you must be sure the informations you pack when coding aren't going to be misinterpreted). Without an update of the standard, the abc notation as an exchange format is useless for any serious purpose, and in fact that's why is ignored (except for a few individuals) outside the folk music circles, and largerly inside them as well. And considering that I see no real interests among the developers on this list to change their mind, I've finally come to decision to stop using the abc notation, except for a restricted number of personal purposes (yes, I love fiddling with TIAO, find a tool like abctwins interesting, and rate the cyberbaker incorporated in abcmus an excellent program), supporting its diffusion, or care about it at all. This actually means, in turn, that after posting this message I will unsubscribe from this list - I hope at least I'll made an awful lot of people happy... Regards Gianni 1 To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
