> From: d@email-addr-hidden
> Just a thought, but perhaps an effort at a LAD HIG (Human Interface
> Guidelines) might be a good idea, so things like this aren't arbitrarily
> different between apps and plugins?
>
> Naturally the scope of such a thing would be limited since different
> programs have different needs, but at least things like twiddling
> parameters could easily be standardized.
That is a good idea. The recent comments on the use of Shift vs Control
and controller changes does highlight some differences. Bristol uses
Shift for accelerator (as in shift your butt) and Control as a decelerator
to have more control of what is being changed but that was an pretty
arbitrary choice I made a while ago.
Which ever seem reasonable/practicable to the group here might also
want to consider the kind of values that Shift/Control might have? Am
not advocating any preference, just giving examples: bristol/brighton
use Shift to go from min to max in 16 steps - ie, reasonably quickly.
Control does the same motion in 256 (I might have actually changed
that a while ago). Up/Down on their own increment by 1/16384th, that
is my best resolution due to using an extraction of MIDI 7bit, dual digit
encoding for the transfer syntax. The behavious is pretty anomalous or
arbitrary, that is admitted.
Most of the keyboard accelerators I use are based on U/D/L/R Arrow
and H/J/K/L 'vi' style controls.
I have no objection to changing them especially if it is a generally agreed
set of changes and a coherent proposal.
There are diverse other issues that might need to be considered such as
how to handle lin vs log controls?
Kind regards, nick
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Received on Thu Nov 24 20:15:04 2011
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Nov 24 2011 - 20:15:04 EET