saraband <darwin886@xxxxxxxx> writes: > --- Immanuel Litzroth <immanuell@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Mikhail Ramendik <mr@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> >> > Hello, >> >> > Any sort of alphabetic medium for typesetting >> notes is about as "right" >> > for a professional musician as it would be "right" >> for a programmer to >> > somehow write programs in the language of musical >> score. So Lilyopnd is >> > simply off track. >> Can you explain why and "alphabetic medium" is not >> "right"? >> >> > The success of TeX for formula editing came, I >> think, from the fact that >> > TeX somehow matches the way a scientist *thinks* >> about a formula. But >> > IMHO, neither Lilypond nor any other alphabetic >> editor can approach the >> > way a musician thinks about score! And that's why >> this won't work. >> Can you explain how a musician thinks about a score, >> and how this cannot be >> expressed in alphabetic editor? >> Immanuel >> >> I'm not sure I follow Mikhail's argument, but for > the record, I am a working musician and I use PMW > (Philip's Music Writer) - a typesetting programme > similar to Lilypond. I've tried many programmes, and > I find coding (particularly with PMW) to be far more > intuitive and versatile than the pointy-clicky > commercial programmes. I am a musician and a programmer and my experience is the same as yours, but I was wondering if this was my experience as a programmer which made me prefer lilypond. Immanuel
