Re: Request for feedback on 'lobbying' paper

[David Kastrup]

Urs Liska <address@hidden> writes:

> Am Dienstag, den 23.04.2013, 13:45 +0200 schrieb David Kastrup:
>> Selling LilyPond with vaporware MusicXML makes only sense if we want
>> to
>> hook people on LilyPond with the promise that they can take their
>> scores
>> into other products eventually.  
> Yes, of course.
>
>> And that promise only makes sense if
>> managing the scores with LilyPond is advantageous over managing the
>> scores with whatever is supposed to read its MusicXML in the end.
> That's what I'm absolutely convinced about by now.
>
> I can't imagine anything that beats a workflow with LilyPond, LaTeX
> and Git to produce a book of sheet music.

Now that's a selling point.  The question is what MusicXML would be a
selling point for.

a) you can export your existing scores to LilyPond
b) you will be able to export your LilyPond scores to other applications
c) if convert-ly does not manage a conversion between LilyPond versions,
   maybe exporting and reimporting MusicXML will
d) you can run a MusicXML business with LilyPond doing the hard work in
   the background

Which of those points might be important for whom?  And who of those
would be able to provide enough funds to pay for external work (work
that would not otherwise be happening)?

> Maybe it's different for other applications, but for preparing
> editions this is really awesome.

Not everybody is preparing critical editions.  So what parts of that
awesomeness transfer to other uses?

-- 
David Kastrup