>On Fri, May 14, 2004 at 12:01:01PM -0400, Paul Davis wrote: >> >I don't mind *IFF* the metadata file has a simple, human readable >> >syntax (no XML please) that can be parsed line by line. >> >> no XML, and yes, parsable line by line, and yes, human readable. *but* >> the plan should be to use the supplied library to get and set >> values. nobody should be doing it themselves otherwise we end up with >> an almighty mess. > >??? Not if the data format is specified. I will fiercely resist any >standard that is defined as a library interface.
I think this is a mistake. Although I know that X does have a protocol at its core, I am convinced that the reason it has been so successful (in addition to its feature set) is that it has had a single, standard stable library interface. I don't know anyone now who *ever* writes X protocol code, and I've never met anyone (except a few people I once knew who worked on a commercial X server, and even that was more than 15 years ago). Wrapping file formats in libraries allows the formats to change without us forcing recompilation on anyone. Defining a file format and believing we got it right is tantamount to a religious act IMHO. Nobody ever gets it right first time. Even if you use a framework like XML or xrm, you still have to define the contents. Its also been a *very* useful approach as JACK has evolved. We have modified the protocol several times without requiring client recompilation. >The plugins I made for AMS have modulation inputs, and I don't see what's Take a side-chain compressor: how can a host know that one input is for the "main signal" and the other is the side-chain? If you leave all connections to the user (as in AMS, i think), this is discernible by a human intelligence, but in something like ardour where the user expects basic connectivity to be done for them, its a problem. >special about them. An we still have 20 + something hint bits... But that's the whole issue. Adding hint after hint after hint ... every one requires a new header file. --p
