On Thu, Dec 07, 2000 at 10:37:08AM -0500, Paul Barton-Davis wrote: > I don't see why we would want 2 sets of bounds. If there is no useful > "real" bound, then just use the existing bound. If there is a "real" > bound, then the GUI should be using it. However, I do think that a > default is a good idea. The alternatives (use lower, upper or middle > or range, or random value) are all poor. I can see the argument for a default value, but a standardised (XML?) format for expressing presets would be more useful. Not keen to get back into XML pros and cons, but... ;) - Steve
- Re: [linux-audio-dev] ardour-0.99.... Paul Barton-Davis
- Re: [linux-audio-dev] ardour-0.99.8 ta... David Benson
- Re: [linux-audio-dev] ardour-0.99.... Paul Barton-Davis
- Re: [linux-audio-dev] ardour-0... David Benson
- RE: [linux-audio-dev] ardour-0.99.8 tarball rel... MOULET Xavier FTRD/DMR/ISS
- [linux-audio-dev] ladspa xml gui Paul Barton-Davis
- Re: [linux-audio-dev] ladspa xml gui Steve Harris
- RE: [linux-audio-dev] ardour-0.99.8 tarbal... David Benson
- RE: [linux-audio-dev] ardour-0.99.8 tarball rel... Richard W.E. Furse
- Re: [linux-audio-dev] ardour-0.99.8 tarball rel... Paul Barton-Davis
- Re: [linux-audio-dev] ardour-0.99.8 tarbal... Steve Harris
- Re: [linux-audio-dev] ardour-0.99.8 ta... Paul Barton-Davis
- LADSPA port hints (was Re: [linux-audio-de... Kai Vehmanen