On Wed, Jul 17, 2002 at 10:28:10 +1000, Conrad Parker wrote: > For plugin (author-defined) defaults, I really can't see how any use of > RDF/XML can be a good thing -- we really should be moving towards defining > a getDefault() method in the API, and even dynamic parameter suggestions.
N.B. that is what I did, the RDF files are just the ondisk form of the data, they aren't used directly. > My concerns are: > * bloat -- requiring all LADSPA hosts to link against libxml and ... > * licensing -- requiring all LADSPA hosts to link to GPL code Defining a C struct to describe settings (which I did, see above) only solves half the problem. The other half is a way of transmitting the defaults and presets between machines with different architectures. The licencing issue I agree with, I would prefer LGPL. > For user-defined presets, for which we need read/write access, do any of > these XML libraries allow concurrent read/write? otherwise anyone using > the same plugin in multiple apps concurrently is going to have a very > easily corrupted preset system. (If we're going to link against GPL code > anyway, we may as well use tdb [http://sourceforge.net/projects/tdb] :) OTOH, I am starting to think that the live format should be a GDBM file (or TDM, I assume its similar), and RDF/XML should just be used for import/export. This adds an extra layer around the settings, but might be generally better. I'm think you'd need two GDBM files, eg. /usr/lib/ladspa/settings/system.gdbm and ~/.ladspa/settings/user.gdbm This has the advantage that multiple hosts can share the same, live settings information. - Steve
