2011/3/2 David Robillard <[email protected]>: > On Wed, 2011-03-02 at 20:55 +0100, Stefano D'Angelo wrote: >> 2011/3/2 David Robillard <[email protected]>: >> > On Wed, 2011-03-02 at 19:31 +0100, Olivier Guilyardi wrote: >> >> On 03/02/2011 06:32 PM, David Robillard wrote: >> >> >> >> > Why you are trying to pick apart web UIs in the same email as you're >> >> > arguing where one size does not fit all I don't know... I want a remote >> >> > control that works on any device out of the box. It's about as blatantly >> >> > obvious as anything can be that web is literally the only way to go for >> >> > that, because the browser is actually on those devices. QED. >> >> > >> >> > Do I think /all/ desktop PC hosts and plugin should use it? No. It's for >> >> > "remote control" things (even if not remote). Is GL good? Yes. I sure >> >> > wish I used it for the Ingen canvas. Has anyone actually showed up yet >> >> > who wanted to write a GL UI? No. Unless you're one, talking about it is >> >> > a waste of time. >> >> >> >> My Android audio application is GL based. Right now I see things from a >> >> host >> >> developer, and am wondering how third-party plugin UIs could integrate >> >> into my >> >> app. Plugin support is in my plans. Of course I will generate the UIs by >> >> myself >> >> from the ports data, but I think that specific well-design UIs could be >> >> nice in >> >> some cases. >> >> >> >> It seems to me like we are talking about different things. You give a lot >> >> of >> >> importance to remote control, why my concern is "$subject on native >> >> hosts". And >> >> you seem to agree that a Web UI is not necessarily adapted for a PC host. >> > >> > Yep. >> > >> >> Right now, all my plans for audio software on mobile platforms involve GL >> >> and >> >> highly interactive interface. If there was a way to create plugin UIs >> >> which are >> >> portable on both desktops and mobile systems, then it could result in >> >> plenty of >> >> attractive plugins arriving on Android and others. But this is only >> >> important >> >> for fancy UIs. The UI can be generated from ports and groups in other >> >> cases as >> >> Paul mentioned. I don't need no HTML stuff for that. >> > >> > I would much rather all the UIs be based on GL than a bunch of different >> > toolkits, but toolkits solve all the problems required (e.g. input), and >> > GL solves a tiny part of it, and people in this community know the >> > toolkits. So here we are. >> > >> >> Also, I am mainly brainstorming and sharing some of the knowledge I >> >> acquired >> >> while doing mobile development. I don't think that I can really help with >> >> the >> >> long-term design choices that you need to make in the context of LV2. But >> >> I hope >> >> that sharing my point of view shred a little light :) >> > >> > UI types aren't pressing decisions (a point that this list in general >> > loves to miss lately...). The UI extension is toolkit agnostic for this >> > reason. Maybe some day someone will make GL plugin UIs. Maybe not. >> > Whatever. >> >> No no and no, this won't be settled down this easy. :-) > > Wanna bet? > > /me goes back to doing something more useful than the perennial l-a-d UI > bikeshedding thing
This is because tonight I decided not to do any coding. :-) _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
