Jan Nieuwenhuizen <jann...@gnu.org> writes: > SoundsFromSound writes: > >> I'm surprised that no one else in those comments responded to any of the >> LilyPond mentions. > > Yes, it could be very interesting to know why comments about Lilypond > are ignored.
Maybe because some people don't comment on things they don't know? I know that's a rather unusual concept these days, but it does increase the quality of discourse. > The blog did inspire me a little bit, we could add two new glyphs > to the feta font that have the opposite meaning of these > > > http://blog.steinberg.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/do-not-copy-1024x489.png Well, I have to admit rolling my eyes when the author stated that those were two new glyphs he really liked. > sharing and copying is good and encouraged! And then blog about it? What about the Creative Commons logos? They are more specific than some "copying allowed" logo, frequently employed, and most people _do_ choose licenses different from effectively Public Domain, so a "Copying Allowed" logo will usually be misleading for some uses. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
