On 28 Mar 2002 09:14:51 -0700 Josh Green <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, 2002-03-28 at 04:33, Stefan Kost wrote: > > hi, > > > > as a small suggestion, what about using xml via libxml2 (www.libxml.org) for the >fileformat. This way, you don't > > need to write a parser and furthermore you know that whats you read is indeed a >devicespec. Example > > <device name="r0x0r tranc3m4chine"> > > <contection> > > <interface>name of mididev"</interface> > > <port>1</port> > > </connection> > > <banks> > > <bank name="rezocool phasers" msb="31" lsb="22"> > > <patches> > > <patch nr="1" name="super acid pad"/> > > <patch nr="2" name="cool juicy 303 thing "> > > <controller>...</controller> > > </patch> > > </patches> > > </bank> > > <bank> > > ... > > </bank> > > ... > > </banks> > > </device> > > > > > > Stefan > >
I basically dont like xml because it's a lot more annoying to write. These files are meant for people to write, not a program. > > I'm curious about how this config file is going to be used. The interest > I have in a MIDI instrument querying API is the querying protocol > itself. I thought that the synth on the other end of the MIDI port (say > an ALSA sequencer port) would just interface to this API. No need to > know how this synth stores the actual patch info. It could be in a sound > font or a fixed set of sounds for an analog synth. How useful would a > static config file be in this API? Perhaps I'm missing something.. Ohh, > a thought just occurred to me. You're probably thinking of this for > external MIDI devices that don't have a method of communicating what > patches they have? Hmm. Sorry for my ramblings :) Cheers! hehe.. exactly. This is meant only for devices that dont support querying, so, even if you have to write a definition file, it keeps transparency in the api. Juan Linietsky
