Subject: Re: This ladspa-rdf stuff works? Was: Re: [linux-audio-dev] TAP-plugins reverb presets
From: Tim Goetze (tim_AT_quitte.de)
Date: Sat Mar 06 2004 - 00:21:32 EET
[Steve Harris]
> We've got on without them for 4 years (bar TAP reverb preset
> selection, but that is a mis-implementation IMHO).
>
> I can't think of any hosts that need enumerations but not RDF for
> other things (accurate defaults, presets, categorisation).
>
> Enumerations are metadata, const values in structs are metadata.
> Encoding metadata in binary formats inside objects is bad practice.
like others, i'm not quite sure discussing this any further is going
to be particularly fruitful, but here goes anyway.
1) we got on for four years because in essence, we could never seem to
agree on how to extend ladspa.
2) we disagree on the meaning of 'meta'. that's nothing to worry about
seeing that this has happened and is happening to great philosophers
past and present, too.
-
i would like to carry your definition to the extreme in a fiendish and
unfair manner, as is my custom (and please let me prefix this with an
expression of my utter regret of being so rude, and with an assertion
of my deepest respect for all your fine efforts in the field so far):
what do we have in ladspa that is *not* 'meta'?
* we have a plugin.
* the plugin has n ports.
* it also offers certain methods to carry out operations for us.
following your line of thought, we arrive at the interesting
conclusion that *everything transcending these concepts* is 'meta'.
some consequences:
* presets are 'meta'.
* value ranges are as much 'meta' as are value labels.
* default values are as much 'meta' as are any hints.
* any textual information about the plugin is 'meta':
- port names are 'meta' since the port is already identified
by its numerical index.
- Maker, Label, Name, Copyright surely are 'meta'.
- Properties are 'meta'.
without doing too big a leap of thought, one may even conclude that
UniqueID is 'meta': it can be stripped from the descriptor because
'file.so' and the index passed to ladspa_descriptor() already contain
enough information to uniquely identify the plugin.
-
i would like to contrast this with a different definition of 'meta':
all information vitally needed for machine *and* man to treat and use
the plugin as intended, without querying other sources than the plugin
itself, is *not* 'meta'. it is 'direct' or 'inherent' knowledge.
some consequences:
* everything labeled 'meta' in the above thought experiment becomes
'not meta', except for the presets.
* knowing that 0.5 = half a second is 'not meta'.
* knowing that 0 = sin, 1 = tri, 2 = saw is vital, thus 'not meta'.
* knowing that the plugin causes 64 frames delay is 'not meta'.
-
my apologies offered for this long-winded and impudent argumentation.
yet to top it off, i would like to question your point of 'keeping
this out of ladspa is making coding simpler'.
what do you think is simpler to do for somebody new to all this:
* learning the API, or
* learning the API *and* RDF?
amicalement,
tim
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Sat Mar 06 2004 - 00:28:20 EET