Re: [linux-audio-dev] LADSPA 2 decision points

On Sat, 2006-04-22 at 21:32 +0100, Steve Harris wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 22, 2006 at 03:05:18PM -0400, Dave Robillard wrote:
> > nonono :) I think metadata outside the plugin is without a doubt the
> > right way to go. I meant I'm just not a huge fan of the particular
> > syntax of this Turtle stuff (as opposed to normal well-formed XML).
> > Mostly because it means we need special tools and who knows what
> > libraries to deal with it.
>
> you cant usefully read RDF/XML with just an XML parser anyway. It's quite
> a lot of work to transform from the XML tree to the RDF graph.
>
> But yes, Turtle support is less widespeard than RDF/XML, but there are
> still Free/Open parsers for every language I can think of (C(++), perl,
> java, python, ruby, javascript, etc.)

Speaking as a general developer, I'd much rather you just used plain
XML. (Pretty much as you have now, in fact.)

Everyone knows XML, and we all have XML parsers installed for pretty
much every language.

Turtle isn't a standard, is aimed at much more general problem areas,
and will just force people to read more docs and install more packages.
It might be a bit nicer for the person writing the plugin file, but that
isn't that much work. (Or does turtle include some essential feature?)

Damon

PS. It sounds a bit strange to break backwards compatibility without
adding new features at the same time. When you do add new features will
you have to break backwards compatibility again?
Received on Mon Apr 24 16:15:03 2006