In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, John Chambers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >David Webber writes: >| From: "Guido Gonzato" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >| >| > and many others. A more complete list will be available in the >| upcoming >| > ABC 2.0.0 draft. >| >| On that topic, let me add that the jump from 1.6 to 2 (rather than >| 1.7) seems well merited by the introduction of parallel voices, >| which is a very big improvement in capability. > >Maybe not. There is a fairly well-established convention in >the computer biz that the first digit should change only >when you break backward compatibility. The V lines don't >break any pre-existing abc. They are a pure extension, not >a change of any sort. So this should probably not warrant a >jump to a version starting with "2.".
I've never heard of that! In fact in my opinion NO program should break backward compatibility! MS Word 2000 reads Word 97, Word 6, Word 2 files.... And USB 2 works with USB1.1 afaik... > >Of course, such things are merely conventions, and lots of >companies have violated them. A big number change is often >done for marketing purposes, to convince users that it's >something they should spend money on. Maybe so, but I would agree with Dave Webber that a large change such as multi-voices really requires a unit increase to 2.0 > >I guess it mostly seems silly to see that we'd be telling >people that there are two versions of abc, 1.6 and 2. This >sounds like a parody of how computer people do things. I don't see why it's a parody, or silly. "There are versions of abc: version 1.6, and some big extensions in the new version 2". Bernard Hill Braeburn Software Author of Music Publisher system Music Software written by musicians for musicians http://www.braeburn.co.uk Selkirk, Scotland To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
