Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] LADSPA proposal ...
From: Steve Harris (S.W.Harris_AT_ecs.soton.ac.uk)
Date: Thu May 27 2004 - 13:22:43 EEST
On Wed, May 26, 2004 at 08:22:17 -0500, Jack O'Quin wrote:
> Steve Harris <S.W.Harris_AT_ecs.soton.ac.uk> writes:
>
> > On Thu, May 27, 2004 at 12:41:36 +0200, Tim Goetze wrote:
> > > other than that, i'm eager to know how plugin ports are to be
> > > referenced in the metadata file. by ID or numerical index? if by ID,
> > > is it the full path to the port: "/SupaPlug/LFO 1/Frequency", or
> > > something more concise? (i'm for a full path scheme because it
> > > allows the plugin writer to reorder ports painlessly.)
> >
> > I think thats an open question, it depends on the metadata language - RDF
> > has some sequence primatives, but I prefer not to use them.
> >
> > In lrdf you call the ports <foo>.0, <foo>.1 etc. where <foo> if the URI of
> > the plugin. It doesnt really matter how you do it.
>
> How about <foo>/port/0, <foo>/port/1, etc.?
>
> Slashes are a natural separator for forming URI's. The plugin writer
> can organize them as desired.
Yeah you can do that as long as you dont use qnames in your URIs (eg.
http://foo.com/bar#baz) but that might be a good idea anyway.
- Steve
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Thu May 27 2004 - 13:17:59 EEST