3 ms·

I don't understand. Older versions of programs cannot open files created by new versions - that's a simple fact of life, has nothing to do with whether a progr

I don't understand. Older versions of programs cannot open files created by new versions - that's a simple fact of life, has nothing to do with whether a program is open or not. I doubt many open programs would limit themselves in that way. As for whether the MSCX format is documented or not, of course it is. MuseScore is fully open source. Every line of code responsible for reading and writing this format is freely available to you to examine, compile, etc. It doens't get more open than that.

smlacy 12y ago
Source code is not documentation. The MuseScore XML files do not contain any link to a DTD, XSD or other XML DOCTYPE metadata, and thus, they are not self-documenting. By comparison, the MusicXML format is open, because the following documentation is available: http://www.musicxml.com/for-developers/ http://www.musicxml.com/for-developers/ Those zip files contain a complete and full specification of how to read & write MusicXML files, as I'm sure the MuseScore developers are familiar with. I wouldn't consider the MuseScore 1.3 or 2.0 format "open" until there is available full specification of the XML file formats, and the ZIP-based container they're usually wrapped in. Even the MuseScore core developers admit there is no save file documentation and warn against attempting to parse MuseScore's save file format: http://musescore.org/node/13837 http://musescore.org/node/13837 This is not "open", and I think it's wrong to sell these engravings as "open scores" in this context.