Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] ladspa plugin GUI proposal
From: David Benson (daveb_AT_idealab.com)
Date: Thu May 25 2000 - 11:07:56 EEST
> Except: I'm in interested in getting musicians and sound engineers to
> use Linux. When faced with the VST GUI for Freeverb, and the one
...
I completely agree, except I am also interested
in winning over plugin authors and host authors. So it is important
to make the gui stuff optional and convenient, all around.
Let me try to summarize what I've heard of the gui dialog.
it is clear that:
- it would be nice to have standardized way to design
guis for ladspa plugins.
- it would be nice to be as toolkit / environment independant
as possible.
Many other questions have been raised:
- should the plugin should make the gui,
or should the host make the gui, or
must both be allowed?
- if the host makes the gui,
how are the necessary hints (output controls) communicated
from the plugin?
- how can a plugin-made gui coexist with
the host's gui?
- should be gui and dsp parts of the plugins be separated?
(eg must they be in the same address space?)
should they be optionally separated?
- should the standard define an API,
or an XML or other data standard with rough
implementations for various guis?
both?
I've heard rough support for:
- i think shared library considerations may
force us to separate the libraries,
even if we define a lightweight gui library,
the host will be required to implement it if
it wants to load plugins that link against that
interface.
(i'd advocate this separation on other grounds anyway)
- xml-defined gui with possible plugin override.
This would be good: it would mostly boil down to a DTD.
Comments?
- Dave
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Thu May 25 2000 - 12:48:30 EEST