On Fri, 8 Aug 2003, Neil Killeen wrote: > > The PMX manual I have was written by Don according to its > own credit line. > . I wildly assumed Don uses English as his primary language > . I reached for the fantastic and proposed to myself that > the creator of PMX was the first to document it. > . Without regard for mathematical induction, I then deduced that > Luigi's manual was a translation of Don's English source. > . Since you tell me this is not the case, then I gather that > Luigi's and Don's manuals are independent creations. Sorry Luigi !
There is no question that Don's manual is and remains the reference to consult. However, Luigi's essay was never intended to be a translation and a glance into it would make that clear. Who on earth would consult a 100+ manual if you can have it in 30 pages? As far I understand Luigi's little book, it is an appetizer for people that do not know yet anything about musixtex and pmx and want to see how it is done. In my contact with my musician colleagues I realized that people are heavily prejudiced by claiming that musixtex, PMX and M-Tx is something for computer freaks and much too difficult to learn for the musician whose main obligation is to make music. In consequence, more than half of Luigi's book are instructive examples. Musicians can take such samples and modify it for their own purpose. > > > . your assertion that my remark indicates an English-o-centric > view of the world is uninformed and inappropriate. I apologize. Surely I do not know you and did not intend to insult you -- and, frankly, I did not expect that you take it seriously. However, if you claim your right to make fun, why should not I have mine? Christof _______________________________________________ TeX-music mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://sunsite.dk/mailman/listinfo/tex-music
