On Monday, November 28, 2011, Tom Breton (Tehom) wrote: > behave as expected. The biggest problem is that they can't offset from > the current value of a controller.
The "current value" of a controller is really more complicated than it seems at a glance. I guess you could search back in time for the last thing Rosegarden actively set it to, and assume that's the current value, although there can be no assurance that's actually the case without setting up some complicated bidirectional communication between Rosegarden and the MIDI playback engine on the receiving end. I definitely wouldn't take it that far, so I suppose the assumption is the only realistic thing you could do, even though it's imperfect. I don't have any big objection to the spirit of making these things behave relative to the assumed "current value," but I'm also inclined to think that the behavior of stripping controllers out of ornaments is probably fundamentally reasonable due to all of these complications. Try to aim at preserving everything of the status quo while enabling the possibility of having new and separate opportunities for those who specifically want them, and actively seek them out. That's what I recommend. -- D. Michael McIntyre ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure contains a definitive record of customers, application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-novd2d _______________________________________________ Rosegarden-devel mailing list [email protected] - use the link below to unsubscribe https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rosegarden-devel
