Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] App metadata intercomunication protocol..
From: Phil Kerr (phil_AT_plus24.com)
Date: Tue Jul 23 2002 - 02:52:30 EEST
Or use something like SOAP?
As long as theres a mechanism for naming the source application and if
needed it's instance, then there shouldn't be a problem. Something like:
<Config id="dpromix01" node="aabbccdd">
.....
data
.....
</Config>
-P
Juan Linietsky wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Jul 2002 00:39:54 +0200
> Vincent Touquet <vincent.touquet_AT_pandora.be> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Jul 22, 2002 at 07:17:27PM -0300, Juan Linietsky wrote:
> > (cut)
> > >How do you think the implementation should be? I cant think of
> > >much, but
> > >i think even a simple communication protocol that can send
> > >tree-organized data
> > >between apps over either tcp or unix sockets should be enough..
> > >Also this
> > >way it could save/load data from XML files. I think XML is very
> > >important for this
> > >because 1-It's standard 2-If we dont use it, We'll have all the xml
> > >lovers saying
> > >the lib is crap because it doesnt use XML ;)
> > (cut)
> >
> > XML of course :)
> >
> > There are those who claim XML is bloat though ;)
> >
> > Nothing is more portable than xml though.
> >
> > Hell, we could be even using Jabber and
> > save / recover state using our own XML based
> > protocol across multiple machines...
> >
> > This could be made very versatile :)
> >
> > So we have:
> >
> > - audio interconnection -> JACK
> > - control interconnection -> ? (alsa ?)
>
> Alsa I guess.. Alsa does midi, but midi
> proovides timing and start/stop commands
> so i think control is by default something
> inhertent to midi. External equipment you can buy
> also uses midi for this.
>
> > - state saving protocol
> > -> some XML based protocol
> >
> > Is this XML based protocol restricted
> > to state accounting only or would it
> > be used for control interconnection
> > protocol too (like midi + some bracket bloat ;) ?
> >
>
> I dont know if the protocol should be xml itself, i was
> talking about the state files it saves. I think by just
> using a tree-based data container protocol for communication
> is enough.. I dont think the lib has to get complicated
> unnecesarily. I'd also limit it for state load / state saving
> for now. I know it would be cool to have an xml transport system,
> but i think the best is to start with a very simple
> lib that proovides the needed functionality for programs and just
> that..
> if we see that something more useful could be done, then version 2.0
> will
> do that ;)
>
> Juan Linietsky
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Tue Jul 23 2002 - 03:08:30 EEST