Software Freedom Song

[lilypond]

Hi,

I'm Jurgen, volunteering for Software Freedom Day 
<https://softwarefreedomday.org>. Some friends at the FSF recommended me 
to reach out to your team with this:


For Software Freedom Day (Sept. 16th), the team Software Freedom Day 
team creating the best Software Freedom Song, can win a nice prize 
donated by MuseScore.


I think it would be cool if someone using Lilypond would create a song 
about Software Freedom!


You can find more details here: 
https://www.digitalfreedomfoundation.org/index.php/171-software-freedom-day-music-challenge


You can join us to chat on Matrix 
<https://matrix.to/#/#SoftwareFreedomDay:matrix.org> if you have more 
questions.


Hope to be hearing from you!

All the best,
Jurgen

Re: DAISY Music Braille Project: Webinar invitation - Introduction to music Braille transcription using the Sao Mai Braille software

[Jacques Menu]

Hello Calvin,

I don’t know, but you can check that with Sarah, who is in charge of the 
Webinar setup. I send the invitation privately.

JM

> Le 3 mars 2022 à 14:08, Calvin Ransom  a écrit :
> 
> Hi JM,
> Will we be able to watch a recording of the webinar? I'm not able to attend 
> it live because that's at 3:00AM local time. 
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> 
> Calvin Ransom

Re: DAISY Music Braille Project: Webinar invitation - Introduction to music Braille transcription using the Sao Mai Braille software

[Calvin Ransom]

Hi JM,
Will we be able to watch a recording of the webinar? I'm not able to attend it 
live because that's at 3:00AM local time.

Thanks!


Calvin Ransom

From: lilypond-user  on behalf 
of Jacques Menu 
Sent: Thursday, March 3, 2022 4:57 AM
To: Lilypond-User Mailing List
Subject: Fwd: DAISY Music Braille Project: Webinar invitation - Introduction to 
music Braille transcription using the Sao Mai Braille software

Hello tutti,

Here is a first presentation of one of the two current projects aiming at a 
powerful tool for Braille music writing.

Sao Mai is a foundation in Vietnam, the other project is being done by the 
MuseScore team.

JM

Début du message réexpédié :

De: Sarah Morley Wilkins 
mailto:sa...@sarahmorleywilkins.com>>
Objet: DAISY Music Braille Project: Webinar invitation - Introduction to music 
Braille transcription using the Sao Mai Braille software
Date: 3 mars 2022 à 13:46:27 UTC+1
À: "music-brai...@daisy.org<mailto:music-brai...@daisy.org>" 
mailto:music-brai...@daisy.org>>

Webinar Invitation: Introduction to music Braille transcription using the Sao 
Mai Braille software for blind musicians and transcribers

Date and time:
Thursday 17 March 2022, 10:00-11:30 UTC.

Description:
We are happy to announce our upcoming webinar, introducing the Braille 
translation features of Sao Mai Braille (SMB) software, with a special focus on 
music Braille transcription. The tool is designed for use by blind musicians as 
well as transcribers.

Organizers:
This webinar is jointly organized by Sao Mai Center for the Blind and the DAISY 
Music Braille project (which is funding the music Braille development). For 
more information about the DAISY Music Braille project, please visit: 
https://daisy.org/activities/projects/music-braille/<https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdaisy.org%2Factivities%2Fprojects%2Fmusic-braille%2F=04%7C01%7C%7C4ad77d2c631b49de62aa08d9fd1567db%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C637819090662230865%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000=EAJAMPMj23VKin9Y45FlkbMURFlZn1KhDRLiN3NoptA%3D=0>

Registration:
Please complete the registration form at 
https://us06web.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_D8Le0FHRQr6IcrT1Oovo3w<https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fus06web.zoom.us%2Fwebinar%2Fregister%2FWN_D8Le0FHRQr6IcrT1Oovo3w=04%7C01%7C%7C4ad77d2c631b49de62aa08d9fd1567db%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C637819090662230865%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000=2d%2FO0eSShg%2FRgI3KQ4riXZtwnfOYRSvM4SwsapCNxlM%3D=0>
to register for the webinar and to receive joining instructions. If you have 
any registration problems, please email us at: 
supp...@saomaicenter.org<mailto:supp...@saomaicenter.org>

Overview of event:
Participants will get a quick tour of the main Braille translation features of 
SMB, with a more detailed demonstration of how to transcribe music scores into 
Braille using SMB. In addition, in the Q session we will be able to answer 
your specific questions about the translation tool.

Speakers:
• Dr. Sarah Morley Wilkins (DAISY Music Braille Project Manager),
• Mr. Hu Haipeng (Technical Consultant of the DAISY Music Braille project), and
• Mr. Phúc Hoai Dang (SMB development team lead from Sao Mai Center for the 
Blind).

Please help circulate the announcement to your network, especially to people 
who are working in music Braille translation.

Many thanks and we look forward to meeting you in the webinar.

Fwd: DAISY Music Braille Project: Webinar invitation - Introduction to music Braille transcription using the Sao Mai Braille software

[Jacques Menu]

Hello tutti,

Here is a first presentation of one of the two current projects aiming at a 
powerful tool for Braille music writing.

Sao Mai is a foundation in Vietnam, the other project is being done by the 
MuseScore team.

JM

> Début du message réexpédié :
> 
> De: Sarah Morley Wilkins  <mailto:sa...@sarahmorleywilkins.com>>
> Objet: DAISY Music Braille Project: Webinar invitation - Introduction to 
> music Braille transcription using the Sao Mai Braille software
> Date: 3 mars 2022 à 13:46:27 UTC+1
> À: "music-brai...@daisy.org <mailto:music-brai...@daisy.org>" 
> mailto:music-brai...@daisy.org>>
> 
> Webinar Invitation: Introduction to music Braille transcription using the Sao 
> Mai Braille software for blind musicians and transcribers
>  
> Date and time:
> Thursday 17 March 2022, 10:00-11:30 UTC.
>  
> Description:
> We are happy to announce our upcoming webinar, introducing the Braille 
> translation features of Sao Mai Braille (SMB) software, with a special focus 
> on music Braille transcription. The tool is designed for use by blind 
> musicians as well as transcribers.
> 
> Organizers:
> This webinar is jointly organized by Sao Mai Center for the Blind and the 
> DAISY Music Braille project (which is funding the music Braille development). 
> For more information about the DAISY Music Braille project, please visit: 
> https://daisy.org/activities/projects/music-braille/ 
> <https://daisy.org/activities/projects/music-braille/>
> 
> Registration:
> Please complete the registration form at 
> https://us06web.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_D8Le0FHRQr6IcrT1Oovo3w 
> <https://us06web.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_D8Le0FHRQr6IcrT1Oovo3w>
> to register for the webinar and to receive joining instructions. If you have 
> any registration problems, please email us at: supp...@saomaicenter.org 
> <mailto:supp...@saomaicenter.org>
> 
> Overview of event:
> Participants will get a quick tour of the main Braille translation features 
> of SMB, with a more detailed demonstration of how to transcribe music scores 
> into Braille using SMB. In addition, in the Q session we will be able to 
> answer your specific questions about the translation tool.
> 
> Speakers:
> • Dr. Sarah Morley Wilkins (DAISY Music Braille Project Manager),
> • Mr. Hu Haipeng (Technical Consultant of the DAISY Music Braille project), 
> and
> • Mr. Phúc Hoai Dang (SMB development team lead from Sao Mai Center for the 
> Blind).
> 
> Please help circulate the announcement to your network, especially to people 
> who are working in music Braille translation.
> 
> Many thanks and we look forward to meeting you in the webinar.

Re: How does this software run on macOS 11 with arm64 architecture?

[Mark Probert]

You wrote:
> It was written:
>> 
>>>> I cannot find a binary package for arm64 and macOS 11 on the
>>>> official website. I don't know how to compile this software on my
>>>> platform.
>>> 
>> 
>>   brew install --cask lilypond
>> 
> I'm in the process of getting an M1 Mac Mini up and going, and Lilypond 
> is a big part of my workflow, as is Homebrew :-) 
> 
> When I run the above command I get an error:
> 
>  "This cask does not run on macOS versions newer than Mojave"
> 
> There are two entries for lilypond, both Casks
> 
>  lilypond  homebrew/casks-versions/lilypond-dev
> 
> The former won't install; the latter installs but when run throws an 
> error:
> 
>  "Bad CPU type in executable"
> 
> I can't say it looks good for Homebrew and lilypond on an M1 as of 
> today.
> 
>  .. mark.
> 
And to update, the Macports version complies and builds as expected 
(2.22.1).

Well done those porters!

 .. m.

Re: How does this software run on macOS 11 with arm64 architecture?

[Jacques Menu]

Hello Mark,

Oups, sorry, my mistake, it’s the MacPorts version I use actually…:

JM

> Le 1 sept. 2021 à 08:18, Mark Probert  a écrit :
> 
> It was written:
>> 
>>>> I cannot find a binary package for arm64 and macOS 11 on the
>>>> official website. I don't know how to compile this software on my
>>>> platform.
>>> 
>> 
>>  brew install --cask lilypond
>> 
> I'm in the process of getting an M1 Mac Mini up and going, and Lilypond 
> is a big part of my workflow, as is Homebrew :-) 
> 
> When I run the above command I get an error:
> 
> "This cask does not run on macOS versions newer than Mojave"
> 
> There are two entries for lilypond, both Casks
> 
> lilypond  homebrew/casks-versions/lilypond-dev
> 
> The former won't install; the latter installs but when run throws an 
> error:
> 
> "Bad CPU type in executable"
> 
> I can't say it looks good for Homebrew and lilypond on an M1 as of 
> today.
> 
> .. mark.
> 
> 
> 

Re: How does this software run on macOS 11 with arm64 architecture?

[Mark Probert]

It was written:
> 
>>> I cannot find a binary package for arm64 and macOS 11 on the
>>> official website. I don't know how to compile this software on my
>>> platform.
>> 
> 
>   brew install --cask lilypond
> 
I'm in the process of getting an M1 Mac Mini up and going, and Lilypond 
is a big part of my workflow, as is Homebrew :-) 

When I run the above command I get an error:

 "This cask does not run on macOS versions newer than Mojave"

There are two entries for lilypond, both Casks

 lilypond  homebrew/casks-versions/lilypond-dev

The former won't install; the latter installs but when run throws an 
error:

 "Bad CPU type in executable"

I can't say it looks good for Homebrew and lilypond on an M1 as of 
today.

 .. mark.

Re: How does this software run on macOS 11 with arm64 architecture?

[Jacques Menu]

Hello Hans,

I use the homebrew version of Lily seamlessly mon my M1 Mac mini.

JM

>> I cannot find a binary package for arm64 and macOS 11 on the
>> official website. I don't know how to compile this software on my
>> platform.
> 
> Install macports
> 
>  https://www.macports.org/install.php
> 
> then say
> 
>  sudo port install lilypond
> 
> on the command line.

If you prefer Homebrew, it works quite the same: Install Homebrew

 https://brew.sh/

then say

 brew install --cask lilypond


 Werner

Re: How does this software run on macOS 11 with arm64 architecture?

[Werner LEMBERG]

>> I cannot find a binary package for arm64 and macOS 11 on the
>> official website. I don't know how to compile this software on my
>> platform.
> 
> Install macports
> 
>   https://www.macports.org/install.php
> 
> then say
> 
>   sudo port install lilypond
> 
> on the command line.

If you prefer Homebrew, it works quite the same: Install Homebrew

  https://brew.sh/

then say

  brew install --cask lilypond


  Werner

Re: How does this software run on macOS 11 with arm64 architecture?

[Hans Aikema]

> On 25 Aug 2021, at 15:01, Thomas Wu  wrote:
> 
> 
> Dear friends,
> 
> I cannot find a binary package for arm64 and macOS 11 on the official 
> website. I don't know how to compile this software on my platform.
> 
> Can someone help me please?
> 
> Thanks,
> Thomas Wu

Hi Thomas,

From it's status page it appears that you would be able to use the MacPorts 
version of Lilypond also on the M1-based Apple systems (listed there as Big Sur 
(arm64)) - cannot confirm myself that it works for M1 systems as I'm still on 
my trustworthy "late 2013" Intel MacBook.

Stable release:
https://ports.macports.org/port/lilypond/details/
Development version:
https://ports.macports.org/port/lilypond-devel/details/

Requires some familiarity with the command-line shell, but is pretty 
straightforward if you have that. For the latest up-to-date package, once 
MacPorts is installed it would be as simple as 'sudo port install lilypond' to 
get the stable version installed.

Note that typically with MacPorts you would be installing/upgrading to 'latest 
available stable/development version'. Using MacPorts to install a historical 
version can be done but requires some more advanced usage (there's 
documentation in the macports project site if you really need it, but my advice 
would be to go with the latest stable or development release)

kind regards,
Hans

Re: How does this software run on macOS 11 with arm64 architecture?

[Werner LEMBERG]

> I cannot find a binary package for arm64 and macOS 11 on the
> official website. I don't know how to compile this software on my
> platform.

Install macports

  https://www.macports.org/install.php

then say

  sudo port install lilypond

on the command line.


Werner

How does this software run on macOS 11 with arm64 architecture?

[Thomas Wu]

Dear friends,

I cannot find a binary package for arm64 and macOS 11 on the official
website. I don't know how to compile this software on my platform.

Can someone help me please?

Thanks,
Thomas Wu

Re: What usb keyboard to enter voices into lilypond? What other hardware and/or Software is indispensable?

[Bernhard Kleine]

Am 11.05.2021 um 16:38 schrieb David Kastrup:
> Bernhard Kleine  writes:
>
>>> Am 24.03.2021 um 09:59 schrieb:
>>>> you plug it into your desktop via USB and it works? Or do I have
>>>> to install other software to make it working?
>>>>
>>>> For windows no driver to install. You just plug in and enable the
>>>> Frescobaldi midi input feature. Absolutely trivial.
>>>>
>>>> Ciao, g.
>> I bought an Alesis V61. Enabling the Port was done in no time. Then I
>> went into a score and tried to enter notes by typing  on the keyboard.
>> Nothind happens. I installed the apleton live lite software to check
>> whether there was a general error. However apleton reacted to
>> keystrokes . What did I do wrong or what has been left out?
> Did you enable the Frescobaldi Midi input feature?  What settings have
> you tried?
In the meanwhile I noticed that input via Keyboard had to activated and
everything is working now.

-- 
spitzhalde9
D-79853 lenzkirch
bernhard.kle...@gmx.net
www.b-kleine.com, www.urseetal.net
Ich darf auf mein neues Buch "670 Falterarten im Hochschwarzwald" aufmerksam 
machen 
(Infos bei mir)
-
thunderbird
GPG schlüssel: D5257409
fingerprint:
08 B7 F8 70 22 7A FC C1 15 49 CA A6 C7 6F A0 2E D5 25 74 09




OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: What usb keyboard to enter voices into lilypond? What other hardware and/or Software is indispensable?

[David Kastrup]

Bernhard Kleine  writes:

>> Am 24.03.2021 um 09:59 schrieb:
>>>
>>> you plug it into your desktop via USB and it works? Or do I have
>>> to install other software to make it working?
>>>
>>> For windows no driver to install. You just plug in and enable the
>>> Frescobaldi midi input feature. Absolutely trivial.
>>>
>>> Ciao, g.
>>
>
> I bought an Alesis V61. Enabling the Port was done in no time. Then I
> went into a score and tried to enter notes by typing  on the keyboard.
> Nothind happens. I installed the apleton live lite software to check
> whether there was a general error. However apleton reacted to
> keystrokes . What did I do wrong or what has been left out?

Did you enable the Frescobaldi Midi input feature?  What settings have
you tried?

-- 
David Kastrup

Re: What usb keyboard to enter voices into lilypond? What other hardware and/or Software is indispensable?

[Bernhard Kleine]

I bought an Alesis V61. Enabling the Port was done in no time. Then I
went into a score and tried to enter notes by typing  on the keyboard.
Nothind happens. I installed the apleton live lite software to check
whether there was a general error. However apleton reacted to keystrokes
. What did I do wrong or what has been left out?

BTW win10-64.

KR Bernhard

Am 24.03.2021 um 09:59 schrieb Gianmaria Lari:


you plug it into your desktop via USB and it works? Or do I have
to install other software to make it working?

For windows no driver to install. You just plug in and enable the
Frescobaldi midi input feature. Absolutely trivial.

Ciao, g.

Re: What usb keyboard to enter voices into lilypond? What other hardware and/or Software is indispensable?

[Federico Bruni]

Il giorno lun, mar 22 2021 at 18:59:58 +0100, Bernhard Kleine 
 ha scritto:

This has not been asked for a while. Which equipment (low cost) do you
favor? Do I need more than an usb keyboard?

As I am / we all are working with opensource software, there isn't any
need for fancy hardware. It only has to work.

Thanks for sharing your situation.


I have the Akai LPK25 Usb Midi Keyboard.
Cheap and easy. I bought it just to experiment with MIDI input and 
Frescobaldi in particular.


I wrote some notes last year on Frescobaldi wiki:
https://github.com/frescobaldi/frescobaldi/wiki/MIDI-input-on-Linux

Re: What usb keyboard to enter voices into lilypond? What other hardware and/or Software is indispensable?

[stefano franchi]

On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 4:00 AM Gianmaria Lari 
wrote:

> you plug it into your desktop via USB and it works? Or do I have to
>> install other software to make it working?
>>
> For windows no driver to install. You just plug in and enable the
> Frescobaldi midi input feature. Absolutely trivial.
>

The mk3 is USB class compliant, and it should work out of the box in linux
too with no additional software or hacks needed. I haven't tried it
personally, though.
(You mentioned using open source software, which makes me think you may be
a linux user.)

Cheers,

S.


-- 
__
Stefano Franchi

stefano.fran...@gmail.com 
*https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Stefano_Franchi*
<https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Stefano_Franchi>

Re: What usb keyboard to enter voices into lilypond? What other hardware and/or Software is indispensable?

[Gianmaria Lari]

> you plug it into your desktop via USB and it works? Or do I have to
> install other software to make it working?
>
For windows no driver to install. You just plug in and enable the
Frescobaldi midi input feature. Absolutely trivial.

Ciao, g.

Re: What usb keyboard to enter voices into lilypond? What other hardware and/or Software is indispensable?

[Bernhard Kleine]

Ciao Gianmaria,

you plug it into your desktop via USB and it works? Or do I have to
install other software to make it working?

Bernhard

Am 24.03.2021 um 08:07 schrieb Gianmaria Lari:
> Ciao Bernhard,
>
> I have the "M-Audio Keystation Mini 32"  that Knute suggests. 
> I can confirm it works flawlessly with Frescobaldi (and Musescore).
> His small size makes it very practical. And it's cheap so if you
> decide to not use it, it should not be a big problem :)
>
> Ciao, g.
>
> On Mon, 22 Mar 2021 at 21:02, Knute Snortum  <mailto:ksnor...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Here's a cheap, USP MIDI keyboard (disclaimer, I haven't used it
> personally):
>
> 
> https://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/KeyStatn3-32m--m-audio-keystation-mini-32-mk3-keyboard-controller
> 
> <https://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/KeyStatn3-32m--m-audio-keystation-mini-32-mk3-keyboard-controller>
>
> --
> Knute Snortum
>
> On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 11:02 AM Bernhard Kleine
> mailto:bernhard.kle...@gmx.net>> wrote:
> >
> > This has not been asked for a while. Which equipment (low cost)
> do you
> > favor? Do I need more than an usb keyboard?
> >
> > As I am / we all are working with opensource software, there
> isn't any
> > need for fancy hardware. It only has to work.
> >
> > Thanks for sharing your situation.
> >
> > Bernhard
> >
> > --
> > spitzhalde9
> > D-79853 lenzkirch
> > bernhard.kle...@gmx.net <mailto:bernhard.kle...@gmx.net>
> > www.b-kleine.com <http://www.b-kleine.com>, www.urseetal.net
> <http://www.urseetal.net>
> > Ich darf auf mein neues Buch "670 Falterarten im
> Hochschwarzwald" aufmerksam machen
> > (Infos bei mir)
> > -
> > thunderbird
> > GPG schlüssel: D5257409
> > fingerprint:
> > 08 B7 F8 70 22 7A FC C1 15 49 CA A6 C7 6F A0 2E D5 25 74 09
> >
> >
>
-- 
spitzhalde9
D-79853 lenzkirch
bernhard.kle...@gmx.net
www.b-kleine.com, www.urseetal.net
Ich darf auf mein neues Buch "670 Falterarten im Hochschwarzwald" aufmerksam 
machen 
(Infos bei mir)
-
thunderbird
GPG schlüssel: D5257409
fingerprint:
08 B7 F8 70 22 7A FC C1 15 49 CA A6 C7 6F A0 2E D5 25 74 09



OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: What usb keyboard to enter voices into lilypond? What other hardware and/or Software is indispensable?

[Gianmaria Lari]

Ciao Bernhard,

I have the "M-Audio Keystation Mini 32"  that Knute suggests.
I can confirm it works flawlessly with Frescobaldi (and Musescore).
His small size makes it very practical. And it's cheap so if you decide to
not use it, it should not be a big problem :)

Ciao, g.

On Mon, 22 Mar 2021 at 21:02, Knute Snortum  wrote:

> Here's a cheap, USP MIDI keyboard (disclaimer, I haven't used it
> personally):
>
>
> https://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/KeyStatn3-32m--m-audio-keystation-mini-32-mk3-keyboard-controller
>
> --
> Knute Snortum
>
> On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 11:02 AM Bernhard Kleine
>  wrote:
> >
> > This has not been asked for a while. Which equipment (low cost) do you
> > favor? Do I need more than an usb keyboard?
> >
> > As I am / we all are working with opensource software, there isn't any
> > need for fancy hardware. It only has to work.
> >
> > Thanks for sharing your situation.
> >
> > Bernhard
> >
> > --
> > spitzhalde9
> > D-79853 lenzkirch
> > bernhard.kle...@gmx.net
> > www.b-kleine.com, www.urseetal.net
> > Ich darf auf mein neues Buch "670 Falterarten im Hochschwarzwald"
> aufmerksam machen
> > (Infos bei mir)
> > -
> > thunderbird
> > GPG schlüssel: D5257409
> > fingerprint:
> > 08 B7 F8 70 22 7A FC C1 15 49 CA A6 C7 6F A0 2E D5 25 74 09
> >
> >
>
>

Re: What usb keyboard to enter voices into lilypond? What other hardware and/or Software is indispensable?

[Knute Snortum]

Here's a cheap, USP MIDI keyboard (disclaimer, I haven't used it personally):

https://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/KeyStatn3-32m--m-audio-keystation-mini-32-mk3-keyboard-controller

--
Knute Snortum

On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 11:02 AM Bernhard Kleine
 wrote:
>
> This has not been asked for a while. Which equipment (low cost) do you
> favor? Do I need more than an usb keyboard?
>
> As I am / we all are working with opensource software, there isn't any
> need for fancy hardware. It only has to work.
>
> Thanks for sharing your situation.
>
> Bernhard
>
> --
> spitzhalde9
> D-79853 lenzkirch
> bernhard.kle...@gmx.net
> www.b-kleine.com, www.urseetal.net
> Ich darf auf mein neues Buch "670 Falterarten im Hochschwarzwald" aufmerksam 
> machen
> (Infos bei mir)
> -
> thunderbird
> GPG schlüssel: D5257409
> fingerprint:
> 08 B7 F8 70 22 7A FC C1 15 49 CA A6 C7 6F A0 2E D5 25 74 09
>
>

What usb keyboard to enter voices into lilypond? What other hardware and/or Software is indispensable?

[Bernhard Kleine]

This has not been asked for a while. Which equipment (low cost) do you
favor? Do I need more than an usb keyboard?

As I am / we all are working with opensource software, there isn't any
need for fancy hardware. It only has to work.

Thanks for sharing your situation.

Bernhard

-- 
spitzhalde9
D-79853 lenzkirch
bernhard.kle...@gmx.net
www.b-kleine.com, www.urseetal.net
Ich darf auf mein neues Buch "670 Falterarten im Hochschwarzwald" aufmerksam 
machen 
(Infos bei mir)
-
thunderbird
GPG schlüssel: D5257409
fingerprint:
08 B7 F8 70 22 7A FC C1 15 49 CA A6 C7 6F A0 2E D5 25 74 09




OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: software

[Kevin Cole]

On a related "note" -- see what I just did there? ;-)

I've just purchased a reMarkable (TM) tablet. I'm not ready to say it's the
greatest thing ever, since I haven't really poked around with it much yet,
but I was looking for two separate products:

* a device that's particularly good at reading PDFs (without trying to be
good at everything else).
* a device on which I could sketch.

I'd looked at a few devices -- most notably Sony's digital paper product
and Wacom tablets -- and the reMarkable seemed to be a reasonable
compromise. Also I was impressed when I saw a guy at our local hackerspace
using one. (In fact, I was unaware of the product until I saw him using it
and said "Cool!")

Here's the tie in -- more of a fantasy at this point: One of the selling
points to me was that it's got a modified Linux under the hood and one can
SSH into it. The company also offers a cloud-based feature that promises to
turn handwriting into text...

That last tidbit looks like the promise of StaffPad. Given the sorta-kinda
open sourciness of the reMarkable, I wonder if the company could be nudged
into going beyond handwriting translation to  notation translation. The
reMarkable wouldn't do playback, but if the cloud service is brainy enough
to do a decent translation, it might be possible for it to "Save as..."
MusicXML or some such, that could then be massaged by Lilypond and / or
MuseScore 3 and / or whatever else is out there, and one can SCP files to
and from the device...

It may be that a more general purpose device from a more proprietary
company, using more closed source software would do a better job, but I'd
rather try to stay a bit closer to the open when possible.

Anyway, just a thought...

Re: software

[Andrew Bernard]

I don't think they ever released this anyway. Mark, has your email
client been hijacked?

As an aside, I have noticed in the last few months a surge in spam
messages on many mailing lists, including one that I run myself..
Maybe spammers are resorting to that as people get better at blocking
spam in personal accounts.

Andrew

Re: software

[Devin Ulibarri]

Is this spam, because it looks like a spam message.
It has no context in any lilypond-related discussions
It also looks to be proprietary, which is no fun at all
On Mon, 2019-12-09 at 08:22 -0800, Mark Stephen Mrotek wrote:
> Hello,
>  
> https://www.staffpad.net/
>  
> Mark

software

[Mark Stephen Mrotek]

Hello,

 

https://www.staffpad.net/

 

Mark

Re: Migrating from commercial music notation software to free alternative

[David Kastrup]

ah  writes:

> Thank you people for the very useful insight and the links.
>
> First, to clarify that by Tex-like I meant programmatically, either
> (La)TeX macros or Scheme plus data.
>
> It looks the task must involve Sibelius at all costs. So migrating is
> not going to happen. However I am warm on the idea of creating a
> Sibelius plugin to call LilyPond if licencing problems can be
> resolved, do some rendering that Sibelius possibly can't and get back
> the result.

I'd consider this a very strange interpretation of "involving Sibelius
at all costs".  It's like paying for a soccer player under the condition
that he gets to be involved in home team plays at all cost, and then he
gets to sell hot dogs.

-- 
David Kastrup

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Migrating from commercial music notation software to free alternative

[ah]

Thank you people for the very useful insight and the links.

First, to clarify that by Tex-like I meant programmatically, either 
(La)TeX macros or Scheme plus data.


It looks the task must involve Sibelius at all costs. So migrating is 
not going to happen. However I am warm on the idea of creating a 
Sibelius plugin to call LilyPond if licencing problems can be resolved,

do some rendering that Sibelius possibly can't and get back the result.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Migrating from commercial music notation software to free alternative

[mskala]

On Wed, 12 Jun 2019, David Kastrup wrote:
> > LaTeX users are accustomed to writing macros in a Turing-complete language
> > with, for instance, if statements.
>
> LaTeX or TeX users?

I said LaTeX users because you did, but the statement is true about both.
TeX users were the original topic of this thread.

> TeX's macros are so peculiar because they rely on ad-hoc macro argument

LilyPond's programming model is very different from TeX's, and will not be
familiar to someone who comes in expecting to program LilyPond the same
way as TeX.  LilyPond is not a "TeX-based" or a "TeX-like" system.  Your
insistence that TeX is "peculiar" suggests that you think, as I do, that
programming LilyPond is much different from programming TeX - which is
what the original poster needs to know.

-- 
Matthew Skala
msk...@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca People before tribes.
https://ansuz.sooke.bc.ca/

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Migrating from commercial music notation software to free alternative

[David Kastrup]

msk...@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca writes:

> On Wed, 12 Jun 2019, David Kastrup wrote:
>> > nor conceptually TeX-like, despite the fact that it uses backslashes.
>>
>> It's a batch processing system with plain text input syntax.  That makes
>> for workflows not unaccustomed to LaTeX users.  By the way, it did
>
> LaTeX users are accustomed to writing macros in a Turing-complete language
> with, for instance, if statements.

LaTeX or TeX users?

> LilyPond has no equivalent concept to TeX macros: variable values in
> LilyPond are data, not code,

Uh, LilyPond's extension language is Scheme, and Scheme has even less of
a distinction between code and data than its ancestor Lisp (which at
least has separate function and value cells for symbols, as opposed to
Scheme).

TeX's macros are so peculiar because they rely on ad-hoc macro argument
matching and "catcode"-based input interpretation, and very lazy
expansion of a separate "mouth" layer.  Basically you have the
cooperating proverbial blind "stomach" (that cannot evaluate
conditionals and make decisions) and the lame "mouth" (that cannot
change the value of variables) executing with loose synchronization, but
you need both to run, say, a loop.

It's really TeX that is the odd system out here.  LilyPond is quite more
"conventionally" tied into Scheme as extension and programming system.

> and are completely evaluated when parsed and assigned.  They always do
> exactly the same thing every time subsequently invoked, and cannot
> contain real conditionals or parameterized behaviour.  All the
> programming-language functionality in LilyPond is shifted into "music
> functions" that can be applied to the dead data, but never used inline
> if they are to retain their programmable behaviour.

I am not sure what you want to be saying here, and if I am unable to
figure out what you mean, chances are slim that someone who does not
even know LilyPond can.

> Complete evaluation at parse time makes programming a much different
> experience, and not one likely to be familiar to a TeX or LaTeX user.

-- 
David Kastrup

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Migrating from commercial music notation software to free alternative

[mskala]

On Wed, 12 Jun 2019, David Kastrup wrote:
> > nor conceptually TeX-like, despite the fact that it uses backslashes.
>
> It's a batch processing system with plain text input syntax.  That makes
> for workflows not unaccustomed to LaTeX users.  By the way, it did

LaTeX users are accustomed to writing macros in a Turing-complete language
with, for instance, if statements.  LilyPond has no equivalent concept to
TeX macros:  variable values in LilyPond are data, not code, and are
completely evaluated when parsed and assigned.  They always do exactly the
same thing every time subsequently invoked, and cannot contain real
conditionals or parameterized behaviour.  All the programming-language
functionality in LilyPond is shifted into "music functions" that can be
applied to the dead data, but never used inline if they are to retain
their programmable behaviour.  Complete evaluation at parse time makes
programming a much different experience, and not one likely to be familiar
to a TeX or LaTeX user.

-- 
Matthew Skala
msk...@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca People before tribes.
https://ansuz.sooke.bc.ca/

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Migrating from commercial music notation software to free alternative

[David Kastrup]

msk...@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca writes:

> On Wed, 12 Jun 2019, ah wrote:
>> ... using a TeX-based or TeX-like (free) music composition system, if
>> available and doing all programming, templating etc. in this myself.
>> Advantages: platform independent and free.
>
> Lilypond is not TeX-based

Well, not any more (as of version 2.0).

> nor conceptually TeX-like, despite the fact that it uses backslashes.

It's a batch processing system with plain text input syntax.  That makes
for workflows not unaccustomed to LaTeX users.  By the way, it did
actually pass lyrics including backslashes on to TeX at one point of
time.

> Its programming interface is all based on Scheme and works quite
> differently from TeX macro expansion.

Its syntax is quite less ad-hoc than that of TeX, but at least LaTeX
with its comparatively rigid constructs tries keeping the mess that TeX
can be in the likeness of something structured.

> If you just mean "free" when you say TeX-like, fine, but if you want
> something that is programmable the same way TeX is, then you should
> consider other free software that is more closely connected to TeX.

"Programmable the same way TeX is" is basically just TeX because TeX is
so very weird.  LilyPond's music functions do a pretty nice job filling
the niche of transforming input of some reasonably concise form into
something else.  For people exploring system-governed music, that can
bring the system closer to the surface.

-- 
David Kastrup

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Migrating from commercial music notation software to free alternative

[Urs Liska]

12. Juni 2019 19:26, "ah"  schrieb:

> ...
> 
> And also whether there will be lots and lots of symbol libraries for him 
> to choose from?
> 

There are essentially *no* native symbol libraries available, but that should 
not disturb you too much. You can instead
- use any glyphs from any system-installed font
- draw custom fonts using PostScript paths
- include images

... and especially you can wrap all these into semantically meaningful commands 
and make them accessible to handwritten or generated input.

HTH
Urs

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Migrating from commercial music notation software to free alternative

[Urs Liska]

12. Juni 2019 19:49, msk...@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca schrieb:

> On Wed, 12 Jun 2019, ah wrote:
> 
>> ... using a TeX-based or TeX-like (free) music composition system, if
>> available and doing all programming, templating etc. in this myself.
>> Advantages: platform independent and free.
> 
> Lilypond is not TeX-based nor conceptually TeX-like, despite the fact that
> it uses backslashes. Its programming interface is all based on Scheme and
> works quite differently from TeX macro expansion. If you just mean "free"
> when you say TeX-like, fine, but if you want something that is
> programmable the same way TeX is, then you should consider other free
> software that is more closely connected to TeX.

To clarify that: LilyPond *is* extremely programmable, it just feels different 
than TeX.

You may also want to have a look at Abjad (http://abjad.mbrsi.org/), a 
Python-based composer's tool that generates LilyPond code.

HTH
Urs


> 
> --
> Matthew Skala
> msk...@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca People before tribes.
> https://ansuz.sooke.bc.ca
> 
> ___
> lilypond-user mailing list
> lilypond-user@gnu.org
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Migrating from commercial music notation software to free alternative

[Karlin High]

On 6/12/2019 11:08 AM, ah wrote:
The main reason is that he is into modern, avant-garde music and the 
notation on his current system is just not there yet or what's offered 
does not satisfy him. He is a professional music composer.


I recommend searching lilypond-user list archives for posts by Andrew 
Bernard, andrew.bern...@gmail.com


He seems to do a lot of "New Complexity" type engraving. Sometimes 
composers make exotic requests, and the entire LilyPond community learns 
some things in the process. I think this thread is representative:



--
Karlin High
Missouri, USA

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Migrating from commercial music notation software to free alternative

[mskala]

On Wed, 12 Jun 2019, ah wrote:
> ... using a TeX-based or TeX-like (free) music composition system, if
> available and doing all programming, templating etc. in this myself.
> Advantages: platform independent and free.

Lilypond is not TeX-based nor conceptually TeX-like, despite the fact that
it uses backslashes.  Its programming interface is all based on Scheme and
works quite differently from TeX macro expansion.  If you just mean "free"
when you say TeX-like, fine, but if you want something that is
programmable the same way TeX is, then you should consider other free
software that is more closely connected to TeX.

-- 
Matthew Skala
msk...@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca People before tribes.
https://ansuz.sooke.bc.ca/

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Migrating from commercial music notation software to free alternative

[ah]

A friend of mine dislikes composing music on the commercial software he 
owns (Si..us). The main reason is that he is into modern, avant-garde 
music and the notation on his current system is just not there yet or 
what's offered does not satisfy him. He is a professional music composer.


I have no idea about music composition.

He asked me for helping him and I see I have two choices, either I 
experiment writing some plugin for his current commercial software I 
mentioned, which is uncharted waters for me plus only available on an OS 
I don't have, or ...


... using a TeX-based or TeX-like (free) music composition system, if 
available and doing all programming, templating etc. in this myself. 
Advantages: platform independent and free.


I can manage any installation challenge and possibly I can persuade him 
to free himself from the GUI for the sake of programmability and 
typesetting/engraving quality.


So, my question is:

Has anyone here had any experience with both the free and the commercial 
music-composition softwares and can give some advice whether it's wise 
to dump the commercial for the free without compromising typesetting 
quality which is my primary metric.


And also whether there will be lots and lots of symbol libraries for him 
to choose from?


(also posted on 
https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/495468/migrating-from-commercial-music-notation-software-to-free-alternative)


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Proprietary Software term

[Ben]

On 8/23/2018 4:57 PM, Urs Liska wrote:



Urs mentions encryption being used by CodaMusic (I've never heard
of them) and that clearly shows an intention of lock-in. OTOH Wols
doesn't lay out here the evidence of the reported intent of Word's
changes. (Actually, I thought it was an open format nowadays.)


Coda Music was the original company re: Finale, way back in the day
before it was sold and became MakeMusic eventually.

I was indeed referring to Finale. At some point (around Finale 2014 or so) the 
company was purchased by an investment company, and one of the first decisions 
was to create an encrypted file format. AFAIK this decision has been reversed 
by now.


I think you're right but honestly, things haven't been the same with 
Finale since the company was bought out...again. And those changes 
madeagain. Yikes.


https://www.webcitation.org/6OerqSdg5  <-- Interesting read...

Plain text sure does look attractive.  :)


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Proprietary Software term

[Urs Liska]

Am 23. August 2018 22:27:33 MESZ schrieb Ben :
>On 8/23/2018 4:21 PM, David Wright wrote:
>> On Sat 18 Aug 2018 at 22:18:51 (+0200), David Kastrup wrote:
>>> David Wright  writes:
>>>
 On Sat 18 Aug 2018 at 19:55:01 (+0100), Wols Lists wrote:
> On 18/08/18 12:51, David Kastrup wrote:
>>> Indeed, that wasn't expressed too well. What I meant is that
 CodaMusic's policy to use binary non-released (for some time
>even
 encrypted) file formats strongly discouraged anyone to make a
>program
 use these files.
>> That's more than just lock-in.  Don't know a good expression, but
>that's
>> more like locked-away (don't know a good expression for it) since
>the
>> format is designed to keep the user from being able to access his
>own
>> information (and/or that of others).  In my book, that's a no-no
>since
>> it renders archiving worthless.
>>
> Undocumented proprietary format.
>
> I compare WordPerfect with Word ... Word's format seems to change
>with
> almost every release, the changes being in many cases apparently
>to
> interfere with compatibility with other programs.
>
> While WordPerfect's format, although proprietary, was
>well-documented,
> with defined extensibility, and a guarantee of compatibility. To
>the
> extent that WordPerfect 6, released in 1994, is to the best of my
> knowledge capable of editing and saving - WITHOUT DAMAGING IT - a
>file
> created by the latest version. So any WordPerfect-compatible
>program
> should be able to do the same.
 "Undocumented proprietary format" doesn't express the intent which
 "lock-in" does. As David pointed out, patents can be used to
>protect
 a proprietary format, only I don't think that, for example, the
>exFAT
 filesystem is, in his words, a "strange case".
>>> A filesystem is not a file format.
>>
>> Urs mentions encryption being used by CodaMusic (I've never heard
>> of them) and that clearly shows an intention of lock-in. OTOH Wols
>> doesn't lay out here the evidence of the reported intent of Word's
>> changes. (Actually, I thought it was an open format nowadays.)
>>
>
>Coda Music was the original company re: Finale, way back in the day 
>before it was sold and became MakeMusic eventually.

I was indeed referring to Finale. At some point (around Finale 2014 or so) the 
company was purchased by an investment company, and one of the first decisions 
was to create an encrypted file format. AFAIK this decision has been reversed 
by now.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Proprietary Software term

[Ben]

On 8/23/2018 4:21 PM, David Wright wrote:

On Sat 18 Aug 2018 at 22:18:51 (+0200), David Kastrup wrote:

David Wright  writes:


On Sat 18 Aug 2018 at 19:55:01 (+0100), Wols Lists wrote:

On 18/08/18 12:51, David Kastrup wrote:

Indeed, that wasn't expressed too well. What I meant is that

CodaMusic's policy to use binary non-released (for some time even
encrypted) file formats strongly discouraged anyone to make a program
use these files.

That's more than just lock-in.  Don't know a good expression, but that's
more like locked-away (don't know a good expression for it) since the
format is designed to keep the user from being able to access his own
information (and/or that of others).  In my book, that's a no-no since
it renders archiving worthless.


Undocumented proprietary format.

I compare WordPerfect with Word ... Word's format seems to change with
almost every release, the changes being in many cases apparently to
interfere with compatibility with other programs.

While WordPerfect's format, although proprietary, was well-documented,
with defined extensibility, and a guarantee of compatibility. To the
extent that WordPerfect 6, released in 1994, is to the best of my
knowledge capable of editing and saving - WITHOUT DAMAGING IT - a file
created by the latest version. So any WordPerfect-compatible program
should be able to do the same.

"Undocumented proprietary format" doesn't express the intent which
"lock-in" does. As David pointed out, patents can be used to protect
a proprietary format, only I don't think that, for example, the exFAT
filesystem is, in his words, a "strange case".

A filesystem is not a file format.


Urs mentions encryption being used by CodaMusic (I've never heard
of them) and that clearly shows an intention of lock-in. OTOH Wols
doesn't lay out here the evidence of the reported intent of Word's
changes. (Actually, I thought it was an open format nowadays.)



Coda Music was the original company re: Finale, way back in the day 
before it was sold and became MakeMusic eventually.



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Proprietary Software term

[David Wright]

On Sat 18 Aug 2018 at 22:18:51 (+0200), David Kastrup wrote:
> David Wright  writes:
> 
> > On Sat 18 Aug 2018 at 19:55:01 (+0100), Wols Lists wrote:
> >> On 18/08/18 12:51, David Kastrup wrote:
> >> >> Indeed, that wasn't expressed too well. What I meant is that
> >> >> > CodaMusic's policy to use binary non-released (for some time even
> >> >> > encrypted) file formats strongly discouraged anyone to make a program
> >> >> > use these files.
> >> 
> >> > That's more than just lock-in.  Don't know a good expression, but that's
> >> > more like locked-away (don't know a good expression for it) since the
> >> > format is designed to keep the user from being able to access his own
> >> > information (and/or that of others).  In my book, that's a no-no since
> >> > it renders archiving worthless.
> >> > 
> >> Undocumented proprietary format.
> >> 
> >> I compare WordPerfect with Word ... Word's format seems to change with
> >> almost every release, the changes being in many cases apparently to
> >> interfere with compatibility with other programs.
> >> 
> >> While WordPerfect's format, although proprietary, was well-documented,
> >> with defined extensibility, and a guarantee of compatibility. To the
> >> extent that WordPerfect 6, released in 1994, is to the best of my
> >> knowledge capable of editing and saving - WITHOUT DAMAGING IT - a file
> >> created by the latest version. So any WordPerfect-compatible program
> >> should be able to do the same.
> >
> > "Undocumented proprietary format" doesn't express the intent which
> > "lock-in" does. As David pointed out, patents can be used to protect
> > a proprietary format, only I don't think that, for example, the exFAT
> > filesystem is, in his words, a "strange case".
> 
> A filesystem is not a file format.

Sure. But it's a format, and it may be proprietary, and it may be
undocumented. The distinction I'm making encompasses a wider range of
instances than just *file* formats¹, and concerns itself with intent
rather than mechanism.

Urs mentions encryption being used by CodaMusic (I've never heard
of them) and that clearly shows an intention of lock-in. OTOH Wols
doesn't lay out here the evidence of the reported intent of Word's
changes. (Actually, I thought it was an open format nowadays.)

But as I'm not in the habit of using proprietary file formats,
it's not that easy to come up with good examples I know much
about, so I used a filesystem example instead.

In the past, AIUI it was necessary to obtain a licence to write
a file in a specific GIF format. While that was the case, it
would not be wise to try and circumvent the licence merely by
writing from scratch a program to write the file. Just saying the file
has a "proprietary format", whether documented or undocumented,
doesn't express the intent that "lock-in" does.

One filesystem (yes, filesystem) format that I *am* in the habit of
using, like countless others, is FAT32. Fortunately its MS patent has
been interpreted as meaning that you can create files with long
filenames, or with short ones, without a licence; but to create a file
with both types of filename, you need a licence. Not having one
proved expensive for TomTom.

With the AARD code I mentioned before, the boot was on the other foot
because its perceived intent fell foul of the US anti-trust laws.
I've read that that settlement cost MS $280M.

So that's my point: intent, and not just whether it's documented.

¹ Though as Wols pointed out, a filesystem is just a format in which
to write a particular type of file: a device file. If the file is
described in a hard drive's partition table, it will normally be
termed a "partition". One could make a backup copy with
# dd if=/dev/sdb1 of=/tmp/backup-copy

Cheers,
David.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Proprietary Software term

[David Kastrup]

Jacques Menu Muzhic  writes:

> Hello Johan,
>
> Do you know the *real* difference between theory and practice? In
> theory, they’re one and the same thing, but in practice, they’re quite
> different...

It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.

-- 
David Kastrup

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Proprietary Software term

[Jacques Menu Muzhic]

Hello Johan,

Do you know the *real* difference between theory and practice? In theory, 
they’re one and the same thing, but in practice, they’re quite different...

JM

> Le 22 août 2018 à 09:25, Johan Vromans  a écrit :
> 
> On Tue, 21 Aug 2018 12:21:08 -0700, Aaron Hill 
> wrote:
> 
>> Patents are entirely concerned with inventions, that is novel, useful, 
>> and non-obvious solutions to specific problems that result either in an 
>> actual product or a practical process.
> 
> That's the theory... Practice is different, unfortunately.
> 
> ___
> lilypond-user mailing list
> lilypond-user@gnu.org
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Proprietary Software term

[Johan Vromans]

On Tue, 21 Aug 2018 12:21:08 -0700, Aaron Hill 
wrote:

> Patents are entirely concerned with inventions, that is novel, useful, 
> and non-obvious solutions to specific problems that result either in an 
> actual product or a practical process.

That's the theory... Practice is different, unfortunately.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Proprietary Software term

[David Kastrup]

Karlin High  writes:

> On 8/21/2018 1:02 PM, Wol's lists wrote:
>> you have to get clear in your mind the distinction between the
>> description, and what is described.
>
> Like that French artist who made paintings of objects titled "This is
> not $OBJECT?"

Magritte's "Ceci n'est pas une pipe" I presume.
.  Apparently
there are indeed more paintings conveying that concept, but I don't
think more than the pipe is well-known.

-- 
David Kastrup

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Proprietary Software term

[Gilles]

On Tue, 21 Aug 2018 14:34:59 -0500, Karlin High wrote:

On 8/21/2018 1:02 PM, Wol's lists wrote:
you have to get clear in your mind the distinction between the 
description, and what is described.


Like that French artist who made paintings of objects titled "This is
not $OBJECT?"


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ren%C3%A9_Magritte


Regards,
Gilles


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Proprietary Software term

[Karlin High]

On 8/21/2018 1:02 PM, Wol's lists wrote:
you have to get clear in your mind the distinction between the 
description, and what is described.


Like that French artist who made paintings of objects titled "This is 
not $OBJECT?"

--
Karlin High
Missouri, USA

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Proprietary Software term

[Aaron Hill]

On 2018-08-21 11:02, Wol's lists wrote:

A patent is
protected by copyright because it is not a thing. It's the thing it
describes that is protected by patent.


Obligatory "I am not a lawyer", but I took a class on intellectual 
property at university.


Patents and copyrights are different beasts, so one should be careful 
not to conflate them.


Patents are entirely concerned with inventions, that is novel, useful, 
and non-obvious solutions to specific problems that result either in an 
actual product or a practical process.


Copyrights, on the other hand, offer protection for the tangible 
expression of an idea in an original medium as well as 
non-transformative derivations into other media.


What is important here is patents can and do protect both things 
(products) and non-things (processes).  However, copyrights only protect 
things (tangible expressions), not non-things (ideas).



-- Aaron Hill

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Proprietary Software term

[Wol's lists]

On 19/08/18 08:44, David Kastrup wrote:

Wols Lists  writes:


On 19/08/18 00:34, David Kastrup wrote:

As any theoretical physicist will tell you, anything that involves
actual hardware also is maths.

Are you telling me that maths PREscribes reality?

No.  Reality's math is inseparable from reality.  The Schrödinger
equation models state spaces, not states.


You've just used the word "model". And Schrodinger describes what MAY 
happen. I know it's just words, but what is reality? As far as I'm 
concerned, if it's a model, or a future possibility, it's not "real".



If hardware is maths, then how comes physicists aren't creating the
reality we would like to live in?

Determining the laws of the universe does not give you a handle for
changing them.


The whole point of patents is that they describe what happens in
reality, what we usually do not understand of the maths, or how we tip
the maths to work in our favour.

The math holds regardless of whether you can think of a way to make use
of it.

And patents are meant to cover the *use* we make of that maths.

I like to draw a little distinction between mathematics and science.
A mathematical proof says "this is logically correct". A scientific
proof says "this is not reality".  Theoretical physicists aren't
scientists, they're mathematicians.

I doubt they'll be considering your verdict authoritive.
Well, they're all philosophers, but within the field of philosophy 
there's a lot of argument about where the borders are. Okay, this is my 
view of it, but to my mind there is a clear distinction. Maths is the  
*logical* *modeling* to either explain what is happening, or try to 
predict what will happen. That's why I said theoretical physics are 
mathematicians. The scientists are the guys either getting data for the 
theoreticians to explain, or trying to test their predictions. (The 
reality, of course, is that many people fall into *both* camps.)

Patents are there for technologists, for people who deal with
scientific proofs, not for mathematicians dealing with mathematical
proofs. A patent deals with "this is how we get reality to do what we
want", not with "this is what logic says should happen".

Newton is easy to prove MATHEMATICALLY CORRECT. He is also easy to
prove SCIENTIFICALLY WRONG.

So you say that Special (and General) Relativity should be patentable?

No. Because they're maths. They're models. They're not real. You need to 
separate the DESCRIPTION from the INSTANTIATION. A patent is protected 
by copyright because it is not a thing. It's the thing it describes that 
is protected by patent.


(And from my studies, Relativity can't be patented for other reasons. 
Like Newtonian Mechanics and eg Boyles Law, Special Relativity doesn't 
actually work in reality. It contains a whole bunch of simplifications. 
Likewise, General Relativity is unsolvable even for the simplest cases.)


To my mind, you have to get clear in your mind the distinction between 
the description, and what is described. And there's a lot of people out 
there with a vested interest in muddying the water. (Not helped, as you 
have shown, by the philosophical question "what is reality?" :-) Like 
most things philosophical, there probably is no definitive answer ...


Cheers,
Wol

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Proprietary Software term

[David Kastrup]

Wols Lists  writes:

> On 19/08/18 00:34, David Kastrup wrote:
>> As any theoretical physicist will tell you, anything that involves
>> actual hardware also is maths.
>
> Are you telling me that maths PREscribes reality?

No.  Reality's math is inseparable from reality.  The Schrödinger
equation models state spaces, not states.

> If hardware is maths, then how comes physicists aren't creating the
> reality we would like to live in?

Determining the laws of the universe does not give you a handle for
changing them.

> The whole point of patents is that they describe what happens in
> reality, what we usually do not understand of the maths, or how we tip
> the maths to work in our favour.

The math holds regardless of whether you can think of a way to make use
of it.

> I like to draw a little distinction between mathematics and science.
> A mathematical proof says "this is logically correct". A scientific
> proof says "this is not reality".  Theoretical physicists aren't
> scientists, they're mathematicians.

I doubt they'll be considering your verdict authoritive.

> Patents are there for technologists, for people who deal with
> scientific proofs, not for mathematicians dealing with mathematical
> proofs. A patent deals with "this is how we get reality to do what we
> want", not with "this is what logic says should happen".
>
> Newton is easy to prove MATHEMATICALLY CORRECT. He is also easy to
> prove SCIENTIFICALLY WRONG.

So you say that Special (and General) Relativity should be patentable?

-- 
David Kastrup

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Proprietary Software term

[Wols Lists]

On 19/08/18 00:34, David Kastrup wrote:
> As any theoretical physicist will tell you, anything that involves
> actual hardware also is maths.

Are you telling me that maths PREscribes reality? Are you telling me
that Newton got it right?

If hardware is maths, then how comes physicists aren't creating the
reality we would like to live in?

Mathematics DEscribes reality. As I understand it, SCOTUS said that
anything that could be done by sweat of the brow, anything that could be
done by someone with pencil and paper and infinite time, is not
patentable. As such, any and all calculations are not patentable. Any
DEscription of reality is not patentable. LOGIC (and that includes
mathematics) is NOT PATENTABLE. (Doesn't prevent patent attorneys
trying, and succeeding :-(

The whole point of patents is that they describe what happens in
reality, what we usually do not understand of the maths, or how we tip
the maths to work in our favour.

I like to draw a little distinction between mathematics and science. A
mathematical proof says "this is logically correct". A scientific proof
says "this is not reality". Theoretical physicists aren't scientists,
they're mathematicians. Patents are there for technologists, for people
who deal with scientific proofs, not for mathematicians dealing with
mathematical proofs. A patent deals with "this is how we get reality to
do what we want", not with "this is what logic says should happen".

Newton is easy to prove MATHEMATICALLY CORRECT. He is also easy to prove
SCIENTIFICALLY WRONG.

Cheers,
Wol

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Proprietary Software term

[David Kastrup]

Wols Lists  writes:

> On 18/08/18 23:28, David Kastrup wrote:
>> zip has been defined using patentable techniques (like
>> https://www.google.com/patents/US5051745) but the implementations are
>> usually unencumbered.
>
> Just because it has been patented does not mean it is patentable :-(
>
> Of course, the problem is persuading the Patent Offices (who are paid
> based on the patents they *issue*) that the patent applications are
> actually invalid.
>
> (A file is just a big number, or a collection of numbers. Anything that
> does not involve actual hardware is maths.

As any theoretical physicist will tell you, anything that involves
actual hardware also is maths.

It's a matter of the respective degrees and aspects.

Every mail I send to this list is representable as one large number.
That does not mean that, it being math, it will never contain patentable
matter.

-- 
David Kastrup

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Proprietary Software term

[Wols Lists]

On 18/08/18 23:28, David Kastrup wrote:
> zip has been defined using patentable techniques (like
> https://www.google.com/patents/US5051745) but the implementations are
> usually unencumbered.

Just because it has been patented does not mean it is patentable :-(

Of course, the problem is persuading the Patent Offices (who are paid
based on the patents they *issue*) that the patent applications are
actually invalid.

(A file is just a big number, or a collection of numbers. Anything that
does not involve actual hardware is maths. None of that is patentable
under either the American or European legal system. Just wish we could
actually get the lawyers to recognise that :-(

Cheers,
Wol

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Proprietary Software term

[David Kastrup]

Wols Lists  writes:

> On 18/08/18 21:18, David Kastrup wrote:
>>> "Undocumented proprietary format" doesn't express the intent which
>>> > "lock-in" does. As David pointed out, patents can be used to protect
>>> > a proprietary format, only I don't think that, for example, the exFAT
>>> > filesystem is, in his words, a "strange case".
>
>> A filesystem is not a file format.
>
> What's the difference? As soon as you take the Unix "everything is a
> file" approach, your filesystem IS a file format.

A filesystem organizes files.  A file format organizes data.

> I run VirtualBox - all my filesystems really are files.

No, they are mapped to files.  The files then represent filesystems.

> Etc etc. Once you start digging, it's all a distinction without a
> difference ...
>
> (take a look at file containers, like zip, vorbis (or is it ogg), mp3
> and mp4, etc. What IS the difference between a file and a filesystem?)

You are changing the topic.  The topic was the difference between a file
format and a file system.  To be viable for patent protection, you need
a technique transferable to other use cases.  Container formats could
contain patentable elements.  XML could have had elements covered by
patents (don't know whether that is the case).  LilyPond's input is
quite free form.  It would be hard to jam any patents on that.

zip has been defined using patentable techniques (like
https://www.google.com/patents/US5051745) but the implementations are
usually unencumbered.

At any rate, there is a wide range of applicability for patenting
generic _organization_ of data but not so much for patenting the
_meaning_ of one layout of data.  That makes file systems a lot more
prone to patent encumbrance than file formats.

A compression layer is good for a lot of trouble either way though LZW
(like in GIF) has by now run out of protection IIRC.

-- 
David Kastrup

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Proprietary Software term

[Wols Lists]

On 18/08/18 21:18, David Kastrup wrote:
>> "Undocumented proprietary format" doesn't express the intent which
>> > "lock-in" does. As David pointed out, patents can be used to protect
>> > a proprietary format, only I don't think that, for example, the exFAT
>> > filesystem is, in his words, a "strange case".

> A filesystem is not a file format.

What's the difference? As soon as you take the Unix "everything is a
file" approach, your filesystem IS a file format. I run VirtualBox - all
my filesystems really are files. Etc etc. Once you start digging, it's
all a distinction without a difference ...

(take a look at file containers, like zip, vorbis (or is it ogg), mp3
and mp4, etc. What IS the difference between a file and a filesystem?)

Cheers,
Wol

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Proprietary Software term

[David Kastrup]

David Wright  writes:

> On Sat 18 Aug 2018 at 19:55:01 (+0100), Wols Lists wrote:
>> On 18/08/18 12:51, David Kastrup wrote:
>> >> Indeed, that wasn't expressed too well. What I meant is that
>> >> > CodaMusic's policy to use binary non-released (for some time even
>> >> > encrypted) file formats strongly discouraged anyone to make a program
>> >> > use these files.
>> 
>> > That's more than just lock-in.  Don't know a good expression, but that's
>> > more like locked-away (don't know a good expression for it) since the
>> > format is designed to keep the user from being able to access his own
>> > information (and/or that of others).  In my book, that's a no-no since
>> > it renders archiving worthless.
>> > 
>> Undocumented proprietary format.
>> 
>> I compare WordPerfect with Word ... Word's format seems to change with
>> almost every release, the changes being in many cases apparently to
>> interfere with compatibility with other programs.
>> 
>> While WordPerfect's format, although proprietary, was well-documented,
>> with defined extensibility, and a guarantee of compatibility. To the
>> extent that WordPerfect 6, released in 1994, is to the best of my
>> knowledge capable of editing and saving - WITHOUT DAMAGING IT - a file
>> created by the latest version. So any WordPerfect-compatible program
>> should be able to do the same.
>
> "Undocumented proprietary format" doesn't express the intent which
> "lock-in" does. As David pointed out, patents can be used to protect
> a proprietary format, only I don't think that, for example, the exFAT
> filesystem is, in his words, a "strange case".

A filesystem is not a file format.

-- 
David Kastrup

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Proprietary Software term

[David Wright]

On Sat 18 Aug 2018 at 19:55:01 (+0100), Wols Lists wrote:
> On 18/08/18 12:51, David Kastrup wrote:
> >> Indeed, that wasn't expressed too well. What I meant is that
> >> > CodaMusic's policy to use binary non-released (for some time even
> >> > encrypted) file formats strongly discouraged anyone to make a program
> >> > use these files.
> 
> > That's more than just lock-in.  Don't know a good expression, but that's
> > more like locked-away (don't know a good expression for it) since the
> > format is designed to keep the user from being able to access his own
> > information (and/or that of others).  In my book, that's a no-no since
> > it renders archiving worthless.
> > 
> Undocumented proprietary format.
> 
> I compare WordPerfect with Word ... Word's format seems to change with
> almost every release, the changes being in many cases apparently to
> interfere with compatibility with other programs.
> 
> While WordPerfect's format, although proprietary, was well-documented,
> with defined extensibility, and a guarantee of compatibility. To the
> extent that WordPerfect 6, released in 1994, is to the best of my
> knowledge capable of editing and saving - WITHOUT DAMAGING IT - a file
> created by the latest version. So any WordPerfect-compatible program
> should be able to do the same.

"Undocumented proprietary format" doesn't express the intent which
"lock-in" does. As David pointed out, patents can be used to protect
a proprietary format, only I don't think that, for example, the exFAT
filesystem is, in his words, a "strange case".

Of course, MS has history of intent here, as for example, the AARD code.
If you didn't use DRDOS (rather than MSDOS) or haven't heard of the
Halloween documents, that might need googling.

Cheers,
David.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Proprietary Software term

[Wols Lists]

On 18/08/18 12:51, David Kastrup wrote:
>> Indeed, that wasn't expressed too well. What I meant is that
>> > CodaMusic's policy to use binary non-released (for some time even
>> > encrypted) file formats strongly discouraged anyone to make a program
>> > use these files.

> That's more than just lock-in.  Don't know a good expression, but that's
> more like locked-away (don't know a good expression for it) since the
> format is designed to keep the user from being able to access his own
> information (and/or that of others).  In my book, that's a no-no since
> it renders archiving worthless.
> 
Undocumented proprietary format.

I compare WordPerfect with Word ... Word's format seems to change with
almost every release, the changes being in many cases apparently to
interfere with compatibility with other programs.

While WordPerfect's format, although proprietary, was well-documented,
with defined extensibility, and a guarantee of compatibility. To the
extent that WordPerfect 6, released in 1994, is to the best of my
knowledge capable of editing and saving - WITHOUT DAMAGING IT - a file
created by the latest version. So any WordPerfect-compatible program
should be able to do the same.

Cheers,
Wol

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Proprietary Software term

[David Kastrup]

Urs Liska  writes:

> Am 18. August 2018 13:08:19 MESZ schrieb DK:
>>Urs Liska  writes:
>>
>>> We've talked about the issue over and over again, but how do we
>>> call it when using proprietary software prevents us from changing
>>> the tools to work with our data/documents? (Well, actually the same
>>> effect that prevents us to edit LilyPond scores with other
>>> programs, although that's not for license but only for practical
>>> reasons).
>>
>>It's not for "license reasons" with proprietary software either since
>>reading the same file format with a program written from scratch
>>would be perfectly fine.  Patents may intervene in strange cases from
>>providing such a program, but copyright generally does.

Generally does _not_.  Sorry.

> Indeed, that wasn't expressed too well. What I meant is that
> CodaMusic's policy to use binary non-released (for some time even
> encrypted) file formats strongly discouraged anyone to make a program
> use these files.

That's more than just lock-in.  Don't know a good expression, but that's
more like locked-away (don't know a good expression for it) since the
format is designed to keep the user from being able to access his own
information (and/or that of others).  In my book, that's a no-no since
it renders archiving worthless.

> In LilyPond's case it's "only" the sheer size of the task.

Let's hope that we get around to doing it eventually.

-- 
David Kastrup

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Proprietary Software term

[Urs Liska]

0

Am 18. August 2018 13:08:19 MESZ schrieb David Kastrup :
>Urs Liska  writes:
>
>> Hi, 
>>
>> I'm pulling my hair because I don't manage to find a certain term to
>> use in an abstract.
>>
>> We've talked about the issue over and over again, but how do we call
>> it when using proprietary software prevents us from changing the
>tools
>> to work with our data/documents? (Well, actually the same effect that
>> prevents us to edit LilyPond scores with other programs, although
>> that's not for license but only for practical reasons).
>
>It's not for "license reasons" with proprietary software either since
>reading the same file format with a program written from scratch would
>be perfectly fine.  Patents may intervene in strange cases from
>providing such a program, but copyright generally does.
>

Indeed, that wasn't expressed too well. What I meant is that CodaMusic's policy 
to use binary non-released (for some time even encrypted) file formats strongly 
discouraged anyone to make a program use these files. In LilyPond's case it's 
"only" the sheer size of the task.

>At any rate, I'd use the term "lock-in" for tool-specific formats,
>usually in the form of "vendor lock-in".

Yes, that's exactly it.

Urs

>
>There is also the expression "walled garden" but it's more used for
>things like app stores.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Proprietary Software term

[David Kastrup]

Urs Liska  writes:

> Hi, 
>
> I'm pulling my hair because I don't manage to find a certain term to
> use in an abstract.
>
> We've talked about the issue over and over again, but how do we call
> it when using proprietary software prevents us from changing the tools
> to work with our data/documents? (Well, actually the same effect that
> prevents us to edit LilyPond scores with other programs, although
> that's not for license but only for practical reasons).

It's not for "license reasons" with proprietary software either since
reading the same file format with a program written from scratch would
be perfectly fine.  Patents may intervene in strange cases from
providing such a program, but copyright generally does.

At any rate, I'd use the term "lock-in" for tool-specific formats,
usually in the form of "vendor lock-in".

There is also the expression "walled garden" but it's more used for
things like app stores.

-- 
David Kastrup

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Proprietary Software term

[Andrew Bernard]

Incompatibility for the second term, vendor lock-in for the first.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vendor_lock-in

Andrew

On Sat, 18 Aug 2018 at 20:17, Urs Liska  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I'm pulling my hair because I don't manage to find a certain term to use
> in an abstract.
>
> We've talked about the issue over and over again, but how do we call it
> when using proprietary software prevents us from changing the tools to work
> with our data/documents? (Well, actually the same effect that prevents us
> to edit LilyPond scores with other programs, although that's not for
> license but only for practical reasons).
>
>
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Proprietary Software term

[Urs Liska]

Am 18. August 2018 12:25:25 MESZ schrieb Trevor :
>
>locked-in?

Strike!
"Vendor lock in" was it what I was looking for.

Thanks
Urs

>
>-- Original Message --
>From: "Urs Liska" 
>To: "lilypond-user" 
>Sent: 18/08/2018 10:53:32
>Subject: Proprietary Software term
>
>>Hi,
>>
>>I'm pulling my hair because I don't manage to find a certain term to 
>>use in an abstract.
>>
>>We've talked about the issue over and over again, but how do we call
>it 
>>when using proprietary software prevents us from changing the tools to
>
>>work with our data/documents? (Well, actually the same effect that 
>>prevents us to edit LilyPond scores with other programs, although 
>>that's not for license but only for practical reasons).
>>
>>Urs

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Proprietary Software term

[Trevor]

locked-in?

-- Original Message --
From: "Urs Liska" 
To: "lilypond-user" 
Sent: 18/08/2018 10:53:32
Subject: Proprietary Software term


Hi,

I'm pulling my hair because I don't manage to find a certain term to 
use in an abstract.


We've talked about the issue over and over again, but how do we call it 
when using proprietary software prevents us from changing the tools to 
work with our data/documents? (Well, actually the same effect that 
prevents us to edit LilyPond scores with other programs, although 
that's not for license but only for practical reasons).


Urs



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Proprietary Software term

[Urs Liska]

Hi, 

I'm pulling my hair because I don't manage to find a certain term to use in an 
abstract.

We've talked about the issue over and over again, but how do we call it when 
using proprietary software prevents us from changing the tools to work with our 
data/documents? (Well, actually the same effect that prevents us to edit 
LilyPond scores with other programs, although that's not for license but only 
for practical reasons).

Urs___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Software playing lilypond's music sheets: releasing appimages

[juppes]

Hi Sam,

Sounds like a very good idea! I downloaded the dumper and the player plus
the files, but the player does not play them giving a message like 'Wrong
file format (wrong header). And the dumper does not do anything when I open
it, although it has been made executable.
I have Linux Mint 64bit Cinnamon on my machine.

Hope you can help me

All best 

Emil



--
Sent from: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/User-f3.html

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Software playing lilypond's music sheets: releasing appimages

[Samuel DA MOTA]

Hi everyone,

Last week I shared with you my toy project about playing lilypond's
music sheets.
For those of you who showed some interest but got stopped by the
compilation steps, I added appimages.
That means, if you want to use these software, all you need to do is
download the file, make it executable, and run it, ... on linux

the player is available at
https://github.com/s-d-m/lilyplayer/releases and the part which
processes your music sheets so that it becomes playable is available
at https://github.com/s-d-m/lilydumper/releases

For ready to use music sheets, you can grab some at
https://github.com/s-d-m/precompiled_music_sheets_for_lilyplayer

For windows and mac users, sorry I didn't get time to port it. If some
of you want to join on that, ... please be my guest.

Cheers

Sam

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Software playing lilypond's music sheets

[Samuel DA MOTA]

Hi Richard and Martin

@Richard:
the reason it failed to compile for you is because I messed up the
Makefile. It is fixed now. Lilydumper compiles just fine with g++-6
and g++-7. You can try again if you want.

@Martin:
Sadly since I use debian and didn't get much time for the packaging,
this was kind of something I was expecting to be honest. Looking at
the error message your sent, there are two issues. One is that
QT_HOST_DATA and QMAKE_SPEC are not found. The "build system" uses
qmake to determine where those libraries are installed and
automatically configure things for you. Can you check what does `qmake
-query` prints on your machine? Maybe you simply don't even need that
on fedora. You can try to edit the script in
https://github.com/s-d-m/lilyplayer/blob/master/src/configure and
comment line 56 (the one which prints
${QT_HOST_DATA}/mkspecs/${QMAKE_SPEC} and see if that works?
The other issue is that it seems some options I were using when
compiling are only available for release build, and ... I'm left
wondering how come on debian it compiled just fine for debug builds.
For that second issue you can try compiling using `make BUILD=release`
or simply update your clone from github as I just fixed that

I wanted to install Fedora on a virtualbox to see what would be the
proper fix, but sadly I got hit virtualbox not launching as described
http://linux.debian.bugs.rc.narkive.com/uLBOQlPv/processed-re-virtualbox-fails-to-start-vm-verr-ldrelf-relocation-not-supported

If some of you wants to help on the packaging side of things (someone
even asked me about windows binaries), or take over the project,
please let me know as I don't plan to spend much more time on it.

Kindest regards

On 13/07/2018, Richard Shann  wrote:
> On Fri, 2018-07-13 at 09:39 +0200, Samuel DA MOTA wrote:
>> Hi Martin,
>>
>> Thanks for the feedback.
>>
>> Unfortunately since it always was a side project I didn't get much
>> time to polish it like I wanted. In any case, feel free to clone it
>> and improve upon.
>>
>> I kept the build system simple on purpose so that fixing these issues
>> shouldn't be too hard. Had I more time I would have used Meson.
>>
>> Out of curiosity, what is the error you get?
>
> I, too, couldn't make lilydumper on Debian 9.3 (stretch) with
> make
> make -C ./src "lilydumper"
> make[1]: Entering directory '/home/rshann/lilydumper/src'
> make[1]: *** No rule to make target 'lilydumper'.  Stop.
>
> but then g++-8 is not available in Debian Stretch it seems ...
>
> Richard Shann
>
>> Cheers
>>
>> On 13/07/2018, Martin Tarenskeen  wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > On Thu, 12 Jul 2018, Samuel DA MOTA wrote:
>> >
>> > > Hi everyone!
>> > >
>> > > I wrote a software a while ago that would play a music sheet
>> > > generated
>> > > by lilypond. It shows the music sheet and follows it with a
>> > > cursor. I
>> > > made a video to demo the end-result. You can watch it at
>> > > https://s-d-m.github.io/lilydumper/intro_assets/lilyplayer-demo.w
>> > > ebm
>> >
>> > Wow. I'm impressed. This is something that I could use!
>> > I downloaded the sources from GitHub but was not able to compile
>> > succesfully (yet). I'm on Linux Fedora 28.
>> >
>> > I hope a userfriendly distribution of the tools will be available
>> > one day.
>> > Or a Makefile that works on my system.
>> >
>> > If anyone has succesfully compiled these tools on a Fedora system
>> > please
>> > share what additional libraries, steps or patches were required.
>> >
>> > --
>> >
>> > MT
>> >
>>
>> ___
>> lilypond-user mailing list
>> lilypond-user@gnu.org
>> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
>

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Software playing lilypond's music sheets

[Martin Tarenskeen]

On Fri, 13 Jul 2018, Samuel DA MOTA wrote:


Hi Martin,

Thanks for the feedback.

Unfortunately since it always was a side project I didn't get much
time to polish it like I wanted. In any case, feel free to clone it
and improve upon.

I kept the build system simple on purpose so that fixing these issues
shouldn't be too hard. Had I more time I would have used Meson.

Out of curiosity, what is the error you get?


When trying to compile lilydumper:

make -C ./src "lilydumper"
make[1]: Entering directory 
'/home/m.tarenskeen/rpmbuild/SOURCES/GIT/lilydumper/src'
make[1]: *** No rule to make target 'lilydumper'.  Stop.
make[1]: Leaving directory 
'/home/m.tarenskeen/rpmbuild/SOURCES/GIT/lilydumper/src'
make: *** [Makefile:4: lilydumper] Error 2

When trying to compile lilyplayer:

make -C ./src "all"
make[1]: Entering directory 
'/home/m.tarenskeen/rpmbuild/SOURCES/GIT/lilyplayer/src'
"/usr/lib64/qt4/bin/uic" -o "ui_mainwindow.hh" "mainwindow.ui" && \
sed -i '1i // Avoid warnings on generated headers\n#if !defined(__clang__)\n  #pragma GCC 
system_header\n#endif\n' "ui_mainwindow.hh"
g++ -std=c++1z -Werror -fno-rtti -fstrict-enums -fstack-protector-all --param ssp-buffer-size=4 -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fPIC -fcf-protection=full 
-fstack-clash-protection -Werror -Wno-pedantic -Wpointer-arith -Wall -Wextra -Wformat=2 -Wnonnull -Winit-self -Wmissing-include-dirs -Wswitch-default 
-Wswitch-enum -Wuninitialized -fstrict-aliasing -Wstrict-overflow=5 -Warray-bounds -Wfloat-equal -Wundef -Wshadow -Wcast-qual -Wcast-align -Wwrite-strings 
-Wconversion -Wsign-conversion -Wmissing-declarations -Wpacked -Wredundant-decls -Winvalid-pch -Wlong-long -Wvarargs -Wvla -funsafe-loop-optimizations 
-Wunsafe-loop-optimizations -Wdouble-promotion -Wsuggest-attribute=pure -Wsuggest-attribute=const -Wsuggest-attribute=noreturn -Wsuggest-attribute=format 
-Wtrampolines -Wzero-as-null-pointer-constant -Wuseless-cast -Wlogical-op -Wvector-operation-performance -Wabi=11 -Wctor-dtor-privacy -Wnoexcept -Weffc++ 
-Wstrict-null-sentinel -Wold-style-cast -Woverloaded-virtual -Wsign-promo -Wswitch-bool -Wlogical-not-parentheses -Wsizeof-array-argument -Wbool-compare -Wodr 
-Wsuggest-final-types -Wsuggest-final-methods -Wsuggest-override -Wnull-dereference -fdelete-null-pointer-checks -Wduplicated-cond -Wplacement-new=2 
-Wconditionally-supported -fsized-deallocation -Wsized-deallocation  -Wduplicated-branches -Wrestrict -Wregister -Wdangling-else 
-Walloc-size-larger-than=1073741824 -Walloc-zero -Walloca -Wformat-overflow=2 -Wformat-truncation=2 -Wstringop-overflow=4 -Waligned-new -Wmultistatement-macros 
-Wcast-align=strict  -fsanitize=address -fsanitize=undefined -fbounds-check  -DQT_NO_DEBUG -D_REENTRANT -DQT_WIDGETS_LIB -DQT_CORE_LIB -DQT_GUI_LIB 
-DQT_SVG_LIB -O0 -ggdb3-isystem "/usr/include" -isystem "/usr/include/QtWidgets" -isystem "/usr/include/QtCore" -isystem 
"/usr/include/QtGui" -isystem "/usr/include/QtSvg" -isystem "**Unknown**/mkspecs/**Unknown**" -I ./ -MD -c -o "main.o" 
"main.cc"
cc1plus: error: /usr/include/QtWidgets: No such file or directory 
[-Werror=missing-include-dirs]
cc1plus: error: **Unknown**/mkspecs/**Unknown**: No such file or directory 
[-Werror=missing-include-dirs]
In file included from 
/usr/include/c++/8/x86_64-redhat-linux/bits/os_defines.h:39,
 from 
/usr/include/c++/8/x86_64-redhat-linux/bits/c++config.h:2450,
 from /usr/include/c++/8/iosfwd:38,
 from /usr/include/c++/8/ios:38,
 from /usr/include/c++/8/ostream:38,
 from main.cc:1:
/usr/include/features.h:381:4: error: #warning _FORTIFY_SOURCE requires 
compiling with optimization (-O) [-Werror=cpp]
 #  warning _FORTIFY_SOURCE requires compiling with optimization (-O)
^~~
In file included from /usr/include/c++/8/ext/string_conversions.h:41,
 from /usr/include/c++/8/bits/basic_string.h:6361,
 from /usr/include/c++/8/string:52,
 from /usr/include/c++/8/bits/locale_classes.h:40,
 from /usr/include/c++/8/bits/ios_base.h:41,
 from /usr/include/c++/8/ios:42,
 from /usr/include/c++/8/ostream:38,
 from main.cc:1:
/usr/include/c++/8/cstdlib:75:15: fatal error: stdlib.h: No such file or 
directory
 #include_next 
   ^~
cc1plus: all warnings being treated as errors
compilation terminated.
make[1]: *** [Makefile:429: main.o] Error 1
rm ui_mainwindow.hh
make[1]: Leaving directory 
'/home/m.tarenskeen/rpmbuild/SOURCES/GIT/lilyplayer/src'
make: *** [Makefile:5: all] Error 2
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Software playing lilypond's music sheets

[Richard Shann]

On Fri, 2018-07-13 at 09:39 +0200, Samuel DA MOTA wrote:
> Hi Martin,
> 
> Thanks for the feedback.
> 
> Unfortunately since it always was a side project I didn't get much
> time to polish it like I wanted. In any case, feel free to clone it
> and improve upon.
> 
> I kept the build system simple on purpose so that fixing these issues
> shouldn't be too hard. Had I more time I would have used Meson.
> 
> Out of curiosity, what is the error you get?

I, too, couldn't make lilydumper on Debian 9.3 (stretch) with
make
make -C ./src "lilydumper"
make[1]: Entering directory '/home/rshann/lilydumper/src'
make[1]: *** No rule to make target 'lilydumper'.  Stop.

but then g++-8 is not available in Debian Stretch it seems ...

Richard Shann

> Cheers
> 
> On 13/07/2018, Martin Tarenskeen  wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > On Thu, 12 Jul 2018, Samuel DA MOTA wrote:
> > 
> > > Hi everyone!
> > > 
> > > I wrote a software a while ago that would play a music sheet
> > > generated
> > > by lilypond. It shows the music sheet and follows it with a
> > > cursor. I
> > > made a video to demo the end-result. You can watch it at
> > > https://s-d-m.github.io/lilydumper/intro_assets/lilyplayer-demo.w
> > > ebm
> > 
> > Wow. I'm impressed. This is something that I could use!
> > I downloaded the sources from GitHub but was not able to compile
> > succesfully (yet). I'm on Linux Fedora 28.
> > 
> > I hope a userfriendly distribution of the tools will be available
> > one day.
> > Or a Makefile that works on my system.
> > 
> > If anyone has succesfully compiled these tools on a Fedora system
> > please
> > share what additional libraries, steps or patches were required.
> > 
> > --
> > 
> > MT
> > 
> 
> ___
> lilypond-user mailing list
> lilypond-user@gnu.org
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Software playing lilypond's music sheets

[Samuel DA MOTA]

Hi Martin,

Thanks for the feedback.

Unfortunately since it always was a side project I didn't get much
time to polish it like I wanted. In any case, feel free to clone it
and improve upon.

I kept the build system simple on purpose so that fixing these issues
shouldn't be too hard. Had I more time I would have used Meson.

Out of curiosity, what is the error you get?

Cheers

On 13/07/2018, Martin Tarenskeen  wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 12 Jul 2018, Samuel DA MOTA wrote:
>
>> Hi everyone!
>>
>> I wrote a software a while ago that would play a music sheet generated
>> by lilypond. It shows the music sheet and follows it with a cursor. I
>> made a video to demo the end-result. You can watch it at
>> https://s-d-m.github.io/lilydumper/intro_assets/lilyplayer-demo.webm
>
> Wow. I'm impressed. This is something that I could use!
> I downloaded the sources from GitHub but was not able to compile
> succesfully (yet). I'm on Linux Fedora 28.
>
> I hope a userfriendly distribution of the tools will be available one day.
> Or a Makefile that works on my system.
>
> If anyone has succesfully compiled these tools on a Fedora system please
> share what additional libraries, steps or patches were required.
>
> --
>
> MT
>

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Software playing lilypond's music sheets

[Martin Tarenskeen]

On Thu, 12 Jul 2018, Samuel DA MOTA wrote:


Hi everyone!

I wrote a software a while ago that would play a music sheet generated
by lilypond. It shows the music sheet and follows it with a cursor. I
made a video to demo the end-result. You can watch it at
https://s-d-m.github.io/lilydumper/intro_assets/lilyplayer-demo.webm


Wow. I'm impressed. This is something that I could use!
I downloaded the sources from GitHub but was not able to compile 
succesfully (yet). I'm on Linux Fedora 28.


I hope a userfriendly distribution of the tools will be available one day. 
Or a Makefile that works on my system.


If anyone has succesfully compiled these tools on a Fedora system please 
share what additional libraries, steps or patches were required.


--

MT

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Software playing lilypond's music sheets

[Jan-Peter Voigt]

Hi Sam,

thanks a lot for sharing this!

Best
Jan-Peter

Am 12.07.2018 um 23:48 schrieb Samuel DA MOTA:
> Hi everyone!
> 
> I wrote a software a while ago that would play a music sheet generated
> by lilypond. It shows the music sheet and follows it with a cursor. I
> made a video to demo the end-result. You can watch it at
> https://s-d-m.github.io/lilydumper/intro_assets/lilyplayer-demo.webm
> 
> The soft is mainly based on the event listener. If you are interested
> in knowing how I extracted pieces of information from lilypond to know
> e.g. where on the music sheet the cursor is and at which time, you can
> read the documentation at https://s-d-m.github.io/lilydumper/
> 
> The tool to extract the data and generate a "playable" music sheet is
> lilydumper: https://github.com/s-d-m/lilydumper and the one that
> actually plays it is lilyplayer: https://github.com/s-d-m/lilyplayer
> 
> If you think adding a new output to lilypond for that use case would
> be nice and have questions, let me know.
> 
> Kindest regards
> 
> Sam
> 
> ___
> lilypond-user mailing list
> lilypond-user@gnu.org
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
> 


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Software playing lilypond's music sheets

[Johan Vromans]

Wow!

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Software playing lilypond's music sheets

[Samuel DA MOTA]

Hi everyone!

I wrote a software a while ago that would play a music sheet generated
by lilypond. It shows the music sheet and follows it with a cursor. I
made a video to demo the end-result. You can watch it at
https://s-d-m.github.io/lilydumper/intro_assets/lilyplayer-demo.webm

The soft is mainly based on the event listener. If you are interested
in knowing how I extracted pieces of information from lilypond to know
e.g. where on the music sheet the cursor is and at which time, you can
read the documentation at https://s-d-m.github.io/lilydumper/

The tool to extract the data and generate a "playable" music sheet is
lilydumper: https://github.com/s-d-m/lilydumper and the one that
actually plays it is lilyplayer: https://github.com/s-d-m/lilyplayer

If you think adding a new output to lilypond for that use case would
be nice and have questions, let me know.

Kindest regards

Sam

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Music Blocks Software and LilyPond Integration

[Devin]

Hi,

I have been working with Walter Bender of Sugar Labs to create
web-based, free software (AGPL) for students to explore music's
fundamental concepts in a visual programming environment (fork of Turtle
Blocks).

I have put the software up at http://www.musicblocks.net and you can try
a stable version of the software at http://play.musicblocks.net.

This software is relevant to lilypond because we aim to have it be
integrated with lilypond software. Currently, it is able to export a
music blocks creation to a simple lilypond file (well-featured, but not
fully-featured), and we plan for it to be able to import lilypond code
as well. Lilypond has been very good for this project, because the code
is text-based and relatively simple to generate from Music Blocks' code
(much appreciation for all the hard work!)

The reason I am reaching out to this list is because, SugarLabs will be
participating in Google Code-in this year (begins Dec 7th) and I may
have questions for the group. May I ask questions related to code-syntax
and integration on this mailing list?

I also wanted to let Lilypond users know about this project, as it might
become a sensible access-point for introducing young and new users to
lilypond since Music Blocks is a reasonably good GUI front-end to
generating Lilypond notation.

Thank you!
Devin
---
www.devinulibarri.com
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Scorio Software

[tisimst]

I wouldn't say I've been "seduced" :-P. I cannot vouch for anything they
have or produce. I was more or less thinking out loud since I have little
experience dealing with MusicXML files.

Best,
Abraham

On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 3:17 AM, Richard Shann-2 [via Lilypond] <
ml-node+s1069038n183282...@n5.nabble.com> wrote:

> On Sun, 2015-11-08 at 21:48 -0700, Abraham Lee wrote:
> > It looks like they use MusicXML as their main data format then process
> > it into LilyPond syntax for engraving on their server.
>
> > Maybe we could work with them to leverage their converter if it works
> > well.
>
> This is highly unlikely, I think you have been seduced by the
> MusicXML-universal-format myth: it is very easy to create a MusicXML
> file from some music. And knowing exactly how you have created it, it is
> easy to read it back (and easy to create LilyPond for it). So Scorio can
> easily take input from the user store it using their version of MusicXML
> and retrieve it again without having the remotest chance of reading
> MusicXML generated by some other program.
>
> There are any number of ways you can create a "valid" MusicXML
> description of some music and it very unlikely that someone could create
> a MusicXML reader that will understand whatever choices you made and
> interpretation you gave without first seeing examples of what you
> generate. So Sibelius can read its own MusicXML (I presume) and so on
> for all the others. Only the people behind MusicXML (that's Finale I
> think) can expect their output to be read by others, because they are
> the de facto standard. They provide a set of examples which people use
> to test their reader - the pages of "documentation" look impressive but
> are (inevitably?) ambiguous.
>
> I notice that MEI talks happily about there being "many ways" you can
> describe the same music notation in its format. It seems to me that the
> ideal would be a way of describing a book containing music notation
> where there would be only one output file that correctly described it. I
> imagine it would need to be a highly constrained notion of what a book
> containing music notation is, to make that possible. And yet, at the
> other extreme, it seems clear that many people would wish to rescue all
> the notes that they had so painstakingly entered into some software for
> re-use in another program when the original gets dropped.
>
> Richard
>
>
>
>
>
> ___
> lilypond-user mailing list
> [hidden email] <http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node=183282=0>
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
>
>
> --
> If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion
> below:
> http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Scorio-Software-tp183277p183282.html
> To start a new topic under User, email ml-node+s1069038n...@n5.nabble.com
> To unsubscribe from Lilypond, click here
> <http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=unsubscribe_by_code=2=dGlzaW1zdC5saWx5cG9uZEBnbWFpbC5jb218Mnw4MzU3Njg3MDU=>
> .
> NAML
> <http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=macro_viewer=instant_html%21nabble%3Aemail.naml=nabble.naml.namespaces.BasicNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NabbleNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NodeNamespace=notify_subscribers%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-instant_emails%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-send_instant_email%21nabble%3Aemail.naml>
>




--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Scorio-Software-tp183277p183432.html
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Scorio Software

[Richard Shann]

On Sun, 2015-11-08 at 21:48 -0700, Abraham Lee wrote:
> It looks like they use MusicXML as their main data format then process
> it into LilyPond syntax for engraving on their server. 

> Maybe we could work with them to leverage their converter if it works
> well.

This is highly unlikely, I think you have been seduced by the
MusicXML-universal-format myth: it is very easy to create a MusicXML
file from some music. And knowing exactly how you have created it, it is
easy to read it back (and easy to create LilyPond for it). So Scorio can
easily take input from the user store it using their version of MusicXML
and retrieve it again without having the remotest chance of reading
MusicXML generated by some other proram.

There are any number of ways you can create a "valid" MusicXML
description of some music and it very unlikely that someone could create
a MusicXML reader that will understand whatever choices you made and
interpretation you gave without first seeing examples of what you
generate. So Sibelius can read its own MusicXML (I presume) and so on
for all the others. Only the people behind MusicXML (that's Finale I
think) can expect their output to be read by others, because they are
the de facto standard. They provide a set of examples which people use
to test their reader - the pages of "documentation" look impressive but
are (inevitably?) ambiguous.

I notice that MEI talks happily about there being "many ways" you can
describe the same music notation in its format. It seems to me that the
ideal would be a way of describing a book containing music notation
where there would be only one output file that correctly described it. I
imagine it would need to be a highly constrained notion of what a book
containing music notation is, to make that possible. And yet, at the
other extreme, it seems clear that many people would wish to rescue all
the notes that they had so painstakingly entered into some software for
re-use in another program when the original gets dropped.

Richard





___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Scorio Software

[Richard Shann]

On Sun, 2015-11-08 at 21:48 -0700, Abraham Lee wrote:
> It looks like they use MusicXML as their main data format then process
> it into LilyPond syntax for engraving on their server. 

> Maybe we could work with them to leverage their converter if it works
> well.

This is highly unlikely, I think you have been seduced by the
MusicXML-universal-format myth: it is very easy to create a MusicXML
file from some music. And knowing exactly how you have created it, it is
easy to read it back (and easy to create LilyPond for it). So Scorio can
easily take input from the user store it using their version of MusicXML
and retrieve it again without having the remotest chance of reading
MusicXML generated by some other program.

There are any number of ways you can create a "valid" MusicXML
description of some music and it very unlikely that someone could create
a MusicXML reader that will understand whatever choices you made and
interpretation you gave without first seeing examples of what you
generate. So Sibelius can read its own MusicXML (I presume) and so on
for all the others. Only the people behind MusicXML (that's Finale I
think) can expect their output to be read by others, because they are
the de facto standard. They provide a set of examples which people use
to test their reader - the pages of "documentation" look impressive but
are (inevitably?) ambiguous.

I notice that MEI talks happily about there being "many ways" you can
describe the same music notation in its format. It seems to me that the
ideal would be a way of describing a book containing music notation
where there would be only one output file that correctly described it. I
imagine it would need to be a highly constrained notion of what a book
containing music notation is, to make that possible. And yet, at the
other extreme, it seems clear that many people would wish to rescue all
the notes that they had so painstakingly entered into some software for
re-use in another program when the original gets dropped.

Richard





___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Scorio Software

[David Kastrup]

Abraham Lee <tisimst.lilyp...@gmail.com> writes:

> While perusing the main LilyPond website, in the announcements
> section, I only just discovered the online software Scorio that acts
> as a GUI front end to LilyPond 2.16. Does anyone on this list actually
> use it? I don't think I ever will for a number of reasons, but I was
> just curious if anyone else does.
>
> It looks like they use MusicXML as their main data format then process
> it into LilyPond syntax for engraving on their server. Maybe we could
> work with them to leverage their converter if it works well.

As opposed to Philomelos, there has not been much of an attempt of
Scorio to cooperate/contribute to LilyPond and their business model also
seems a lot more closed down.

It would make much more sense to actually integrate the work on
musicxml2ly that Patrick Schmidt from Philomelos has in his GitHub
repository into LilyPond.  He offered this for taking but does not have
the time to put this into patches or similar by himself.

But if someone wants to work on that, it should be reasonably
low-hanging fruit.

-- 
David Kastrup

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Scorio Software

[Martin Tarenskeen]

On Sun, 8 Nov 2015, Abraham Lee wrote:


While perusing the main LilyPond website, in the announcements section, I
only just discovered the online software Scorio that acts as a GUI front
end to LilyPond 2.16. Does anyone on this list actually use it? I don't
think I ever will for a number of reasons, but I was just curious if anyone
else does.I did subscribe for a (free) account but had forgotten about it until I 

read your post. I guess that shows clearly how much I have used it ;-)

I guess it could be interesting for iPads or chromebooks. But I don't see 
a reason to use online apps if I can do things much faster and much better 
offline.


On http://www.scorio.com/web/scorio/platform I read this:

"The superb music notation, which is based on the principles of 
classical sheet music engraving, is guaranteed by using LilyPond as a 
sheet music generator. The aesthetically balanced arrangement of notes 
among multiple systems takes place automatically. LilyPond is regarded by 
experts as being one of the finest sheet music generators available today. 
The modular design of the platform will allow the future integration of 
sheet music generators other than LilyPond."


It would be nice if the Scorio people would give something back to the 
LilyPond community for this "superb music notation" that they use to make 
some money. Like improved MusicXML import/export. But I don't really count 
on it.


--

MT

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Scorio Software

[Abraham Lee]

While perusing the main LilyPond website, in the announcements section, I
only just discovered the online software Scorio that acts as a GUI front
end to LilyPond 2.16. Does anyone on this list actually use it? I don't
think I ever will for a number of reasons, but I was just curious if anyone
else does.

It looks like they use MusicXML as their main data format then process it
into LilyPond syntax for engraving on their server. Maybe we could work
with them to leverage their converter if it works well.

Best,
Abraham
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Scorio Software

[Martin Tarenskeen]

It looks like I deleted some lines in my reply. It should start like 
this:


I subscribed for a free account on the Scorio website long ago. But I 
forgot all about it until I read your post. I guess that shows clearly how 
much I have used it ;-)


--

MT

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

[OT] solfege to notes software?

[Federico Bruni]

Hi all

this is a bit off-topic, as it's not closely related to LilyPond.
I'm trying to imagine any possible way to avoid the boring part of 
typesetting, i.e. entering notes and durations.


Do you know any application which can create music (in lilypond format) 
from a real person who solfeges a piece? It could  be interesting for 
people not comfortable with piano keyboard and not willing to spend 
money for a MIDI keyboard.


Do you think that it could work?
Obviously, pitches would not be recognizable but the program should be 
able to:


- recognize the note names, possibly following the key signature 
specified at the beginning
- set the right durations, by setting a tempo click to follow during 
the solfege


I guess that dotted durations would be hard to catch by a software:

c4. d8 - Do - o_Re


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: [OT] solfege to notes software?

[Jay Vara]

All music in Carnatic Classical music is written in solfege. Not sure if this
is an example of what you are talking about. Plus there is no specific
standard, but rather a bunch of different conventions. And the
ornamentations are left to the performer and not specifically written.
Timing is handled - all solfeges are quarter notes, a comma extends it to a
half note, and a semicolon extends it by one note. Eighth, sixteenth, etc
notes are obtained by adding one or more underlines to the solfege. Measures
are seperated by vertical bars, with dotted bars used for sub-measures.
 
If we were to use the solfege {sa ri ga ma pa da ni} for {c d e f g a b},
then c4 d2 e1 would be written sa ri, ga,;  where sa is a c4, ri, is d2
and ga,; is e1. The same three notes with an underline covering all three
notes would be - c8 d4 e2. With two underlines, c16 d8 e4 and so on. ga;
would be e2. (dotted note).

Also, the solfeges are in lilypond terms absolute, with the higher octaves
represented with a dot on top of the solfeges and the lower octaves with a
dot below. Another complication is that the solfege frequencies are only
fixed relative to each other.

I essentially use a combination of programs to get the solfege to lilypond
format. Depending on the accuracy of the original writers of the solfeges,
the results are not bad. 

There are 72 key signatures, and I ended up defining these in lilypond
itself.



--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/OT-solfege-to-notes-software-tp169427p169434.html
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: [OT] solfege to notes software?

[Federico Bruni]

Il giorno sab 13 dic 2014 alle 20:15, Jay Vara j...@diljun.com ha 
scritto:
All music in Carnatic Classical music is written in solfege. Not sure 
if this

is an example of what you are talking about.


No, I was talking about how to enter quickly music in lilypond format:

1. type lilypond input (slow) - what we all do
2. you play a MIDI keyboard and Rumor turns it to lilypond input
3. you read the music (solfege) following a certain tempo and a 
software catches note names and durations (pitches to be checked 
manually later)


I was daydreaming about a software who can do option 3.


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

solfege to notes software?

[Flaming Hakama by Elaine]

Frederico,

I am very interested in this question, too.

In theory, you could do the following:

Get a DAW like Logic that does audio = midi conversion
1. Record your singing to an audio track in your DAW
2. Convert the audio to midi.  There are settings or features to figure
out the tempo, and quantize rhythmic values (specifying the smallest
rhythmical unit, so you don't end up with random 32nd and 64th note values
for things you sang with rhythmic embellishment.)
3. Export a midi file

4. Then, you can theoretically convert that midi file in to lilypond
using midi2ly


I was hoping someone could comment on the status of midi2ly, since I am
still unable to use it on mac OSX 10.8.5 / Lilypond 2.18.2 with a wrong
architecture error:

$ midi2ly -v
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File /Applications/LilyPond.app/Contents/Resources/bin/midi2ly, line
54, in module
import midi
ImportError:
dlopen(/Applications/LilyPond.app/Contents/Resources/lib/lilypond/current/python/midi.so,
2): no suitable image found.  Did find:

/Applications/LilyPond.app/Contents/Resources/lib/lilypond/current/python/midi.so:
mach-o, but wrong architecture


But, I am under the impression that midi2ly does actually work on non-mac
platforms, or older mac platforms.


Regarding spending money, Logic costs about $200.  There are lots of other
DAWs out there that do audio recording and audio = midi conversion.  Not
sure of any that are free or cheap, but I wouldn't doubt if you could find
one.


On Sat, Dec 13, 2014 at 8:19 AM, lilypond-user-requ...@gnu.org wrote:

 Message: 6
 Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2014 17:19:03 +0100
 From: Federico Bruni fedel...@gmail.com
 To: lilypond-user lilypond-user@gnu.org
 Subject: [OT] solfege to notes software?
 Message-ID: 1418487543.294...@smtp.gmail.com
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; Format=flowed

 Hi all

 this is a bit off-topic, as it's not closely related to LilyPond.
 I'm trying to imagine any possible way to avoid the boring part of
 typesetting, i.e. entering notes and durations.

 Do you know any application which can create music (in lilypond format)
 from a real person who solfeges a piece? It could  be interesting for
 people not comfortable with piano keyboard and not willing to spend
 money for a MIDI keyboard.

 Do you think that it could work?
 Obviously, pitches would not be recognizable but the program should be
 able to:

 - recognize the note names, possibly following the key signature
 specified at the beginning
 - set the right durations, by setting a tempo click to follow during
 the solfege

 I guess that dotted durations would be hard to catch by a software:

 c4. d8 - Do - o_Re



HTH,

David Elaine Alt
415 . 341 .4954   *Confusion is
highly underrated*
ela...@flaminghakama.com
self-immolation.info
skype: flaming_hakama
Producer ~ Composer ~ Instrumentalist
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: solfege to notes software?

[Federico Bruni]

Il giorno sab 13 dic 2014 alle 20:56, Flaming Hakama by Elaine 
ela...@flaminghakama.com ha scritto:

Frederico,

I am very interested in this question, too.

In theory, you could do the following:

Get a DAW like Logic that does audio = midi conversion
1. Record your singing to an audio track in your DAW
2. Convert the audio to midi.  There are settings or features to 
figure out the tempo, and quantize rhythmic values (specifying the 
smallest rhythmical unit, so you don't end up with random 32nd and 
64th note values for things you sang with rhythmic embellishment.)

3. Export a midi file

4. Then, you can theoretically convert that midi file in to 
lilypond using midi2ly


That would require to sing the notes at the right pitch. Not easy. I'd 
rather use my instrument in that case.
But I guess that the audiomidi conversion would never be precise 
enough.




I was hoping someone could comment on the status of midi2ly, since I 
am still unable to use it on mac OSX 10.8.5 / Lilypond 2.18.2 with a 
wrong architecture error:


$ midi2ly -v
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File /Applications/LilyPond.app/Contents/Resources/bin/midi2ly, 
line 54, in module

import midi
ImportError: 
dlopen(/Applications/LilyPond.app/Contents/Resources/lib/lilypond/current/python/midi.so, 
2): no suitable image found.  Did find:

/Applications/LilyPond.app/Contents/Resources/lib/lilypond/current/python/midi.so: 
mach-o, but wrong architecture



I guess that you are talking about this issue:
https://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=2208

It seems that there are some workarounds.


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Jniz music notation software

[Bruno Grandjean]

Hello

Just to inform you that Jniz is a new free software designed for musicians as a 
support tool to the musical composition.

It is using Lilypond to export in midi, lilypond formats.

The website: http://www.jniz.org

Hope you will enjoy it..

All the best

Bruno Grandjean

Jniz dev

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Steinberg's progress report on new notation software

[Janek Warchoł]

[lots of discussion about LilyPond vs other notation software]

Hi people,

it seems that i've missed an important discussion.  After reading it
(and reading comments on the Steinberg blog), i decided to add my
comment in the form of a blog post:
http://lilypondblog.org/2013/08/honestly-is-lilypond-good-enough/
I'd be interested in hearing your opinions in the comments!

best,
Janek

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Steinberg's progress report on new notation software

[Jacques Menu]

Hello Janek,

Very interesting post, thanks!

Typo: algorythmic

JM

Le 14 août 2013 à 10:54:17, Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.com a écrit :

 [lots of discussion about LilyPond vs other notation software]
 
 Hi people,
 
 it seems that i've missed an important discussion.  After reading it
 (and reading comments on the Steinberg blog), i decided to add my
 comment in the form of a blog post:
 http://lilypondblog.org/2013/08/honestly-is-lilypond-good-enough/
 I'd be interested in hearing your opinions in the comments!
 
 best,
 Janek
 
 ___
 lilypond-user mailing list
 lilypond-user@gnu.org
 https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Steinberg's progress report on new notation software

[Andrew Bernard]

An absolutely marvellous typo in our particular context. :-)

Andrew

   	   
   	Jacques Menu  
  14 August 2013 
7:25 PM
  Typo:algorythmic

  


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Steinberg's progress report on new notation software

[Janek Warchoł]

Lol, indeed!
Thanks for letting me know, Jacques! Corrected.

Janek

2013/8/14 Andrew Bernard andrew.bern...@gmail.com


 An absolutely marvellous typo in our particular context. :-)

 Andrew

   Jacques Menu jacques.m...@tvtmail.ch
  14 August 2013 7:25 PM

 Typo: algorythmic






 ___
 lilypond-user mailing list
 lilypond-user@gnu.org
 https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user


compose-unknown-contact.jpg___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Steinberg's progress report on new notation software

[Jan-Peter Voigt]

Am 08.08.2013 14:09, schrieb David Kastrup:

Well, if enough people only slightly overstep a line, it will disappear.
I think it would make sense to expand on most followup thoughts in our
own blog, once they can't be expected to be of much interest to Daniel.

While he will be able to answer competently about Sibelius, again this
is not what his blog is about.

So far, he has been polite in his reactions and I commend him for that.
But the question you should ask yourself is what chances you have to
make him interested or enjoyed in his reactions.  If you can't think of
anything, remember that this is basically his home on the web.

+1
I must admit, that I didn't read all he wrote about his projects. But 
what I saw, he is answering politely and competent. And he seems 
passionate in his work.
So I hope my diffuse speech yesterday was not misunderstood! I think 
Daniel Spreadbury is passionate at work with his projects and what he is 
doing with his colleagues at steinberg might be a really good thing.

The only thing I don't like for now is the closed file format.
He wrote something about coexistance. That would be nice - and if 
lilypond would open his gates that it can also export musicXML files, it 
would be a step on lilyponds side.


Just another comment on a longrunningthread


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Steinberg's progress report on new notation software

[Urs Liska]

Am 08.08.2013 04:29, schrieb SoundsFromSound:

Thoughts?

http://blog.steinberg.net/2013/08/development-diary-part-two/?fb_source=pubv1

For now just one:
Let's see if Kieren's comments on the post provoke _any_ response.
Anybody ready to write a post on lilypondblog.org about polymetrics, 
absence of bar restrictions etc.?

I would really cherish if _someone_ would do this who hasn't posted so far.
Maybe less with the 'we can do better' attitude that somewhat poisoned 
my 'Finale' post(s) but rather like 'that's an interesting feature of 
LilyPond, and the Spreadbury post triggered some thoughts about it'.

And BTW such a post would be very welcome in its own right.

So _please step out_ and contact us.

Urs




-
composer | sound designer
--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Steinberg-s-progress-report-on-new-notation-software-tp148842.html
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Steinberg's progress report on new notation software

[SoundsFromSound]

I'm surprised that no one else in those comments responded to any of the
LilyPond mentions. 
As a former SCORE user, personally I can't possibly imagine /ever /going
back now that I've tried LilyPond. There truly is just no comparison.
Period. 
With LilyPond, you're only limited by your imagination.

When I go to pack away my scores for the definitive and long-term archive
master, I engrave everything in LilyPond. 
I'm currently in the process of converting all my older scores now too, to
LilyPond. 

To each their own, I guess.

We'll see what Daniel and the team has planned...


Urs Liska wrote
 Am 08.08.2013 04:29, schrieb SoundsFromSound:
 Thoughts?

 http://blog.steinberg.net/2013/08/development-diary-part-two/?fb_source=pubv1
 For now just one:
 Let's see if Kieren's comments on the post provoke _any_ response.
 Anybody ready to write a post on lilypondblog.org about polymetrics, 
 absence of bar restrictions etc.?
 I would really cherish if _someone_ would do this who hasn't posted so
 far.
 Maybe less with the 'we can do better' attitude that somewhat poisoned 
 my 'Finale' post(s) but rather like 'that's an interesting feature of 
 LilyPond, and the Spreadbury post triggered some thoughts about it'.
 And BTW such a post would be very welcome in its own right.
 
 So _please step out_ and contact us.
 
 Urs



 -
 composer | sound designer
 --
 View this message in context:
 http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Steinberg-s-progress-report-on-new-notation-software-tp148842.html
 Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

 ___
 lilypond-user mailing list
 

 lilypond-user@

 https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
 
 
 ___
 lilypond-user mailing list

 lilypond-user@

 https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user





-
composer | sound designer
--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Steinberg-s-progress-report-on-new-notation-software-tp148842p148848.html
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Steinberg's progress report on new notation software

[Urs Liska]

Am 08.08.2013 10:35, schrieb SoundsFromSound:

I'm surprised that no one else in those comments responded to any of the
LilyPond mentions.
As a former SCORE user, personally I can't possibly imagine /ever /going
back now that I've tried LilyPond. There truly is just no comparison.
Period.
With LilyPond, you're only limited by your imagination.

When I go to pack away my scores for the definitive and long-term archive
master, I engrave everything in LilyPond.
I'm currently in the process of converting all my older scores now too, to
LilyPond.

To each their own, I guess.

We'll see what Daniel and the team has planned...
Of course there are some advantages of using programs like Sibelius for 
applications that aren't the key target of LilyPond (e.g. arranging and 
similar tasks where it is essential to have quick and flexible access to 
the material.


And I think that adding text input as an option (if it is thoroughly 
thought through) would be a great step forward for the resulting 
program. One could say of course that such an extension would make 
LilyPond's advantages smaller. But I think that's not the point. Of 
course LilyPond's goal should be to be as good as possible, but not 
necessarily compared to the competitors.


Urs



Urs Liska wrote

Am 08.08.2013 04:29, schrieb SoundsFromSound:

Thoughts?

http://blog.steinberg.net/2013/08/development-diary-part-two/?fb_source=pubv1

For now just one:
Let's see if Kieren's comments on the post provoke _any_ response.
Anybody ready to write a post on lilypondblog.org about polymetrics,
absence of bar restrictions etc.?
I would really cherish if _someone_ would do this who hasn't posted so
far.
Maybe less with the 'we can do better' attitude that somewhat poisoned
my 'Finale' post(s) but rather like 'that's an interesting feature of
LilyPond, and the Spreadbury post triggered some thoughts about it'.
And BTW such a post would be very welcome in its own right.

So _please step out_ and contact us.

Urs



-
composer | sound designer
--
View this message in context:
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Steinberg-s-progress-report-on-new-notation-software-tp148842.html
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
lilypond-user mailing list


lilypond-user@

https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user





-
composer | sound designer
--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Steinberg-s-progress-report-on-new-notation-software-tp148842p148848.html
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Steinberg's progress report on new notation software

[Jan Nieuwenhuizen]

SoundsFromSound writes:

 I'm surprised that no one else in those comments responded to any of the
 LilyPond mentions. 

Yes, it could be very interesting to know why comments about Lilypond
are ignored.

The blog did inspire me a little bit, we could add two new glyphs
to the feta font that have the opposite meaning of these


http://blog.steinberg.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/do-not-copy-1024x489.png

sharing and copying is good and encouraged!  And then blog about it?

Greetings,
Jan

-- 
Jan Nieuwenhuizen jann...@gnu.org | GNU LilyPond http://lilypond.org
Freelance IT http://JoyofSource.com | Avatar®  http://AvatarAcademy.nl  

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Steinberg's progress report on new notation software

[Urs Liska]

Am 08.08.2013 11:06, schrieb Jan Nieuwenhuizen:

SoundsFromSound writes:


I'm surprised that no one else in those comments responded to any of the
LilyPond mentions.

Yes, it could be very interesting to know why comments about Lilypond
are ignored.

The blog did inspire me a little bit, we could add two new glyphs
to the feta font that have the opposite meaning of these

 
http://blog.steinberg.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/do-not-copy-1024x489.png

sharing and copying is good and encouraged!  And then blog about it?

Greetings,
Jan


Well, now there is at least one (and right from the top ;-) ):
http://blog.steinberg.net/2013/08/development-diary-part-two/#comment-610

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Steinberg's progress report on new notation software

[Jan Nieuwenhuizen]

Urs Liska writes:

 And I think that adding text input as an option (if it is thoroughly
 thought through) would be a great step forward for the resulting
 program.

Aren't they talking about keyboard entry, instead of text input?

Text input is about the storage format.  Most wordprocessors have
keyboard entry, yet compare a the opaque .doc [or even .docx] with
latex.  There's no way to read, manipulate, work with those.

Jan

-- 
Jan Nieuwenhuizen jann...@gnu.org | GNU LilyPond http://lilypond.org
Freelance IT http://JoyofSource.com | Avatar®  http://AvatarAcademy.nl  

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user