Olivier Guilyardi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Paul Davis wrote: >>> Actually, I just started from the following assumption : a midi >>> hardware controller is a input device, among keyboard, mouse and >>> others. >> the problem is that its also an output device, for some midi h/w. add >> this into the situation, and you start to realize that the midi h/w is >> actually a "GUI" just like the one on the screen. forcing one GUI to >> be mediated by another seems odd. > > Okay, let me try to improve this... > > Assumption v0.2 : a midi hardware controller is a set of input and > output devices, and is in its nature identical to the more > conventional monitor, keyboard and mouse. > > And because I like ascii diagrams, here is where this assumption drives me : > > +----------------+ +--------------+ +--------------+ > | input & output | <----- X ------> | GUI Toolkit | | Application | > | devices | <---- Midi ----> | (gtk, etc..) | <---> | (MVC or not) | > | | <-- Whatever --> | | | | > +----------------+ +--------------+ +--------------+ > > About configuration : there are tools to map keys to letters for a > keyboard, so there could be tools to map knobs to controllers in case > of a midi box. > > This is all theoritical, but can it be considered false ?
It at least would hurt users like me. If I already have an alternative input/output device like a MIDI controller, I do not want to have to run a GUI as well, since I actually wouldnt even see it. In my mind, the application should be the engine/model, and all views/controllers should be independent of each other. Having to go through the bloat of running GTK or something similar is just silly if what someone wants is to just send/receive MIDI data. -- CYa, Mario
