[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > just a quick release of 1.3.84. It has some small bugfixes, and two
> > new convertors.
>
> > One for PMX (a Musixtex preprocessor). The gmd archive has a number of
> > PMX files. I only tested barsant.pmx (a 2 staff piece, that nicely
> > shows off weaknesses in the LilyPond spacing engine).
>
> I didn't see the result, but I know - and told it already in this list -
> that PMX's spacing engine is excellent. Hard to beat.
> Therefore I'm
> looking for the reverse converter.
Go ahead, be my guest.
I'm planning to look into the spacing engine of Lily when I have some
time. The biggest problem is that large variation of durations
(eg. 64th and quarter notes in the same measure) leads to
extraordinary wide spacing in lily, and this leads to scores taking
too much pages.
BTW, I'd be delighted with a write-up on how PMX does its spacing
... Don?
> > The other one is for musedata. Musedata
> > (http://www.ccarh.org/musedata/) is a large collection of digitized
> > music (I believe > 1000 pieces, lots of JSBach). The license that the
> > music comes with is annoying (no commercial use), [...]
>
> Do you think GMD-archive's license is less annoying?
Music licensing has been discussed before, and I think we can agree on
the fact that we disagree on it. Let me suffice with the following
> In the same way I could imagine that the Musedata-owners do allow more
> if they are asked for permission as they state in their general CR-clause.
Of course they do, but that is not what I want. The Musedata-owners (I
wrote to them) will only make exceptions on a person-by-person basis,
meaning that whatever they allow me to do with the scores don't extend
to those who download it off my homepage. I consider this unfair.
(and FWIW, I wasn't aware that there was a central GMD policy for
licenses. The print on the webpage is rather small, and this license
is not on all scores, I believe)
--
Han-Wen Nienhuys | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.cs.uu.nl/~hanwen/
