Oops, a little late response this time... On Wed, 24 Oct 2001, Taybin Rutkin wrote:
>> PS Reasons for using standard ecasound syntax instead of xml in >> the preset files are a) consistency (-> man ecasound(1)), and >> b) to avoid dependency to a xml-parser library (main ecasound >> only requires libc and libstdc++). > I should've responded sooner, but I really think it would be better if you > used a cross-app format for LADSPA presets. One of the best reasons for > using presets is that LADSPA authors can distribute them with their > plugin. They can't do this if there are two competing formats. This shouldn't be a problem. Ecasound's preset files are not just presets, but actually descriptions of whole plugin networks (multi-operator, multi-chain w/ controllers). So they aren't very useful to other apps (without linking to or duplicating libecasound). On the other hand it should be relatively easy to add support for a common xml-based LADSPA-preset format outside libecasound (for instance a python script for converting from LADSPA-xml_preset -> ecasound preset). Just as long we have a format that everyone agrees to use. Are there other competing formats or is Ardour's preset format the one to use? How about other LADSPA hosts; snd, GLAME, gdam, etc - do you support LADSPA-presets? -- http://www.eca.cx Audio software for Linux!
