Udo Richter wrote:
> On 18.04.2009 15:36, Luca Olivetti wrote:
>> On Sat, 18 Apr 2009 13:28:24 +0200
>> Udo Richter<udo_rich...@gmx.de> wrote:
>>> This is mostly what the VDR skin interface already provides: A
>>> semantically structured description of the interface. Most skins
>>> translate this into a bitmapped OSD view, but they don't have to. The
>>> skincurses plugin for example uses the text console. VDR itself never
>>> uses the OSD directly, only through the two standard skins.
>> That only works if the default vdr menu layout (i.e. a simple
>> name:value list) fits your needs.
>> If you need a different layout you have to draw directly to the osd
>> (with the side effect that the skincurses plugin won't work).
> Sure. But as I said: VDR only uses the skin interface. Plugins do use
> the OSD directly, but currently expect it to be bitmapped. Vectorized
> structures could be provided by custom skins using plugin-to-plugin
> IMHO a bitmapped interface is a good compromise of flexibility and
> simplicity, while vectorized systems tend to be quite complex. (think of
> XUL (mozilla) or XAML (microsoft).)
> However, there's no reason why, for example, a plugin like text2skin
> could not provide advanced rendering to other plugins.
This is good news. But is there anyone willing to take the task to
developed either new plugin or update text2skin?
Is text2skin even maintained anymore - let alone thought to be updated
by the author to vectorized direction?
vdr mailing list