[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Re: SMuFL
From: |
Evan Driscoll |
Subject: |
Re: Re: SMuFL |
Date: |
Sat, 10 Aug 2013 14:32:16 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130621 Thunderbird/17.0.7 |
As a fairly outside observer who is only an occasional user of Lilypond....
On 08/09/2013 11:43 PM, Carl Peterson wrote:
> The concern I have on SMuFL is that it is an as-of-yet immature standard
> without broad support outside of Steinberg. ... Will it be a futile
> effort because the SMuFL standard dies from lack of interest/acceptance?
A flip side of that question is: How much would adding Lilypond support
for SMuFL help to *make* SMuFL into an accepted and common standard?
I don't want to say "you guys should (not) support SMuFL", but I think
that question is worth thinking about, even if you decide the answer is
"probably not much." :-)
Evan
- SMuFL, Urs Liska, 2013/08/09
- Re: SMuFL, Jan-Peter Voigt, 2013/08/09
- Re: SMuFL, Urs Liska, 2013/08/09
- Re: SMuFL, Carl Peterson, 2013/08/09
- Re: SMuFL, Urs Liska, 2013/08/09
- Re: SMuFL, Shane Brandes, 2013/08/09
- Re: SMuFL, Andrew Bernard, 2013/08/09
- Re: SMuFL, Werner LEMBERG, 2013/08/10
- Re: SMuFL, Carl Peterson, 2013/08/10
- Re: SMuFL, Werner LEMBERG, 2013/08/10
- Re: Re: SMuFL,
Evan Driscoll <=
- Re: SMuFL, David Kastrup, 2013/08/10
- Re: SMuFL, Andrew Bernard, 2013/08/10
- Re: SMuFL, David Kastrup, 2013/08/10
- Re: SMuFL, Andrew Bernard, 2013/08/10
- Re: SMuFL, Urs Liska, 2013/08/10
- Re: SMuFL, Andrew Bernard, 2013/08/10
- Re: SMuFL, Urs Liska, 2013/08/10
- Re: SMuFL, David Rogers, 2013/08/10
- Re: SMuFL, Werner LEMBERG, 2013/08/11
- Re: SMuFL, David Kastrup, 2013/08/11