Re: The Proposed Charter Update

Thank you for these proposals, James. I have incorporated both of your proposals for paragraph 2, but not the proposals for paragraphs 1 and 4.

As Daniel has stated in the MNX GitHub issues, it has never been a goal for MNX to replace file formats used by existing long-established music notation applications. That goal is neither desirable nor feasible. MNX handles new use cases that MusicXML does not, but this is not one of them.

We do need to balance MNX development with MusicXML and SMuFL maintenance, and have MNX make as much use of existing MusicXML and SMuFL technology as possible. I think your proposals for paragraph 2 captures this better than the original wording, but I think the paragraph 1 wording is still important to retain for clarifying the work of the group.

With the proposed paragraph 4, W3C group charters typically get revised every few years. Specifics about longer-term ideas are generally not included. Since the charter refers to “notated music” we are not excluding other notations from our overall scope. Any work on non-Western notations will follow the completion of MNX 1.0. That would be a good time to take stock of future projects for the group, and update the charter if needed.

Best regards,

Michael Good
VP of MusicXML Technologies
MakeMusic, Inc.


> On Nov 23, 2021, at 6:35 AM, James Ingram <j.ingram@netcologne.de> wrote:
> 
> 
> This posting is in response to the call for comment in
> https://www.w3.org/community/music-notation/2021/11/22/co-chair-meeting-november-22-2021/ <https://www.w3.org/community/music-notation/2021/11/22/co-chair-meeting-november-22-2021/>
> 
> The Proposed Charter is at
> https://www.w3.org/community/music-notation/wiki/Proposed_Charter_Update <https://www.w3.org/community/music-notation/wiki/Proposed_Charter_Update>
> Below is a Summary of how I'd formulate the Scope of Work, but first, here are the changes with their reasons:
> 
> In Scope of Work, paragraph 1, the words
> 
> > while maximizing the existing investment in implementations of the existing MusicXML and SMuFL specifications
> should simply be deleted.
> 
> MNX is going to be a free, open-source replacement for all the proprietary formats currently used by standard music notation editing applications.
> This means that interface formats like MusicXML will no longer be required. The simpler exchange of information between the implementations that currently use MusicXML should increase turnover, and so be of benefit to the industry as a whole. Such implementations should therefore be encouraged to migrate to MNX.
> 
> ...
> 
> In paragraph 2, the words
> 
> > The group is proposing the development...
> 
> should be replaced by the fact:
> 
> "The group is developing..."
> 
> and the words
> 
> > MNX is designed to leverage as much as possible of the existing MusicXML schema.
> 
> should be replaced by the following (or equivalent):
> 
> "A primary design goal for MNX is ease of migration from MusicXML."
> 
> ...
> 
> I would like to add a 4th paragraph that mentions the group's longer term vision. (We are at the W3C here.):
> "In the longer term, the group envisions the development of specifications dealing with notations other than Common Western Music Notation, for example Arabic or Asian notations."
> 
> *************************************************************************
> 
> Summary. Here's how the Scope of Work would then read:
> 
> 
> "The Community Group documents, maintains and updates the MusicXML and SMuFL (Standard Music Font Layout) specifications. The goals are to evolve the specifications to handle a broader set of use cases and technologies, including use of music notation on the web.
> 
> The group is developing a new specification to embody this broader set of use cases and technologies, under the working title of MNX. The MNX specification is designed to represent Common Western Music Notation in a tightly specified, semantic fashion in order to deliver a high degree of interoperability between a broad range of applications that require such a representation. A primary design goal for MNX is ease of migration from MusicXML.
> 
> The group is proposing the development of an additional new specification to provide a standard, machine-readable source of musical instrument data. This data includes information both for the display and playback of music notation that is specific to each different instrument.
> 
> In the longer term, the group envisions the development of specifications dealing with notations other than Common Western Music Notation, for example Arabic or Asian notations."
> 
> 
> All the best
> James Ingram
> -- 
> 
> https://james-ingram-act-two.de <https://james-ingram-act-two.de/>
> https://github.com/notator <https://github.com/notator>
>