Re: [GLISS] non-timed or non-musical events "z" "y"

[Graham Percival]

On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 11:39:52PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
> Graham Percival <address@hidden> writes:

> > I think we need to decide what direction we want the syntax to
> > move in (or indeed, decide not to change the syntax at all!).
> 
> I don't see the point in the repeated threats of locking me out from
> what I am working on.

You have a fundamental misunderstanding of these discussions.  The
intent is to share ideas, not to bring forward formal proposals
for language modifications.

> > Yes, of course a shared project would be much easier with a
> > benevolent dictator.
> 
> The only alternative I see so far is a benevolent slave.  Nobody is
> working on syntax right now except me.  And nobody is interested in
> working on it except me.  Instead people are interested in telling me
> what I should be doing.

You are not a slave.  Nobody is telling you what you should be
doing.  Nobody is demanding that you take these discussions
seriously -- in fact, I have repeatedly told you *not* to take
them seriously!

> > However, other than a few specific instances (such as the stable/2.16
> > branch), I don't think that we *want* benevolent dictators.  A number
> > of people want to discuss syntax possibilities.
> 
> Where is the point in blind people voting on the color of the sky?

We're not voting.  We *won't* be voting.  Besides, we haven't even
seen a single serious proposal yet!

(other than ideas from you and Han-Wen, maybe.  Although I
seriously think that ligature should be placed the same way as
slurs and beams, I have not yet submitted a formal proposal to
this effect.)

> > Most of those other ideas
> > are unworkable, but until we examine each idea, we won't know if it is
> > actually workable or not.
> 
> Wrong.  Until _I_ examine each idea, you won't know if it is actually
> workable or not.

Most of the ideas are unworkable from the standpoint of
unambiguous notation of music.  If a human can't understand what
the syntax means, then of course a computer can't understand it!

- Graham