Re: preliminary GLISS discussions

[David Kastrup]

Werner LEMBERG <address@hidden> writes:

>>> Ouch.  Sound like something we seriously don't want at all.
>> 
>> Right - this means that we seriously don't want to be a music
>> interchange/storage format.
>
> What about a *subset* of LilyPond for this purpose?

It should be reasonably easy to use displayLilyMusic in connection with
a few hooks (toplevel-book-handler and its ilk) for a stripped LilyPond
exporter.  Its charm would be moderate: basically, it would preserve
information better than MusicXML.  At the cost of being more
version-dependent.

It would, however, be a reasonably well-understood subset, and should
meet the parse/interpret-separately paradigm.

-- 
David Kastrup