Re: can we use Wikipedia to promote LilyPond? I think yes!

[David Kastrup]

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