Re: musescore lands sponsoring?

[Federico Bruni]

2012/5/29 Janek Warchoł <address@hidden>:
>> What do you mean with "technically superior"? It's about the output?
>> I think it's LilyPond output. Can you confirm?
>> http://www.opengoldbergvariations.org/node/191
>
> This isn't Lily output, it's directly from MuseScore.
> You were fooled by the fact that MuseScore uses our Feta font.
>

Ok, I suck with recognizing the output.. I was quite sure to be wrong :-)

>> Last year I was thinking about trying to introduce LilyPond in some
>> music schools in my area.
>> But then I realized that anyone who is not a kind of geek will be
>> scared away by the text input (no matter how powerful it is).
>
> There is a chance, but only when the syntax is *obvious* enough.
> Currently used syntax isn't obvious enough, but it won't be difficult
> to change it, i think.
[cut]
> Sure, it's much longer, but everything's pretty obvious even for
> someone who sees lily code for the first time.
>

You are right, this is important.
But there are many people who don't want to even _see_ a text file, so
they don't care about nice/bad syntax.

Rodolfo's experience (see previous email) is probably common to many of us.

>> The other big obstacle is: schools in general (in any area) organize
>> classes and workshops on software programs used by the industry.
>> LilyPond should be first introduced in the publishing industry...
>> but... how many geeks work in the music publishing companies?
>
> There is a plan to change this.  Currently it's top secret ;) because
> we don't know if it'll work out, but if it does, we'll need help.
> We'll post a call to arms on user, be ready :)

Great! Ready to help if I can