On Wed, 2006-04-26 at 07:05 -0400, Paul Davis wrote: > On Wed, 2006-04-26 at 11:51 +0100, Steve Harris wrote: > > I've written a first cut at an ontology/schema for the plugin RDF: > > http://plugin.org.uk/ladspa2/ladspa-2.ttl > > > > The term schema is a bit misleading, as it doesn't really enforce > > anything, it really just gives you some hints about what to write. The > > bulk of it is english text to explain the meaning of the bits that are no > > longer in the .h > > > > I tried to write it as clearly as possible, but the machine readable parts > > might still be a bit cryptic and there could be errors. Shout if there's > > any bits that don't make sense. > > i know you didn't want to actually change much of the spec, but i would > like to protest at the continued inclusion of the "logarithmic" port > hint. its totally useless. at the very least, the hint should be removed > and replaced by two other hints: logarithmicE and logarithmic10. saying > that something might be better viewed using a logarithmic scale really > says nothing useful. a more satisfactory solution would add "dBFS" to > indicate that the port contains values indicating volumetric or gain > levels. something like that.
Ah! No removing the logarithmic hint! :) Specifying the base along with it would be a very good idea though. Better to have a 'logarithmic' hint and a seperate 'log_base' though. -DR-
