[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: can we use Wikipedia to promote LilyPond? I think yes!
From: |
David Kastrup |
Subject: |
Re: can we use Wikipedia to promote LilyPond? I think yes! |
Date: |
Wed, 08 Feb 2012 17:15:37 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.92 (gnu/linux) |
Janek Warchoł <address@hidden> writes:
> Wikipedia uses LaTeX to render math formulas. Why couldn't it use
> LilyPond to create music examples in articles?
>
> Why LilyPond is perfect for Wikipedia:
> - text input, can be created using a web browser
> - easy to create both vector graphics and raster images at any given
> resolution
> - GNU GPL'ed
Wikipedia was more leaning towards CC licensing schemes.
> ...and thats not including Lily great output quality. See how some
> examples look now: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melisma - yuck!!
>
> using Lily as built-in score editor will be beneficial for Wikipedia,
> and i'm pretty sure that for us it will be a huge promotion!
> Thoughts?
A publication like Wikipedia would likely have considerable leanings
towards a MusicXML-based solution.
Like using TeX for maths, anything that easily explodes into
self-defined macro systems with questionable long-term compatibility and
maintainability is not likely to sit well with them. Easily convertable
tweak-less subsets of LilyPond (the sort of thing that would survive a
MusicXML roundtrip) would have the best chance to have some appeal.
--
David Kastrup