Re: [LAD] sliders/fans

> From: d@email-addr-hidden
> To: nickycopeland@email-addr-hidden
> > 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.
>
> Makes sense. We also need a "don't move, but hard set to this point I
> am clicking", but middle click is convention for that so it doesn't need
> a modifier. We do need an "I want to type in a value", though...

Hm, we need to review how many apps have hijacked Middle_Mouse for
controller registration. I thought Ardour had done this, bristol has: if you
click middle mouse then I register the next MIDI CC so the control tracks
that CC. I think Ardour might use (used to use?) Control-Middle_Mouse
for this purpose. No objection to either approach if 'enter a value' is
the target here for Middle_Mouse on its own.

> > 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.
>
> This would have to be defined in relation to the underlying unit the
> controller is for, to address the quantisation issues Fons has
> mentioned, or at least worded in a more generic way.

Personally I don't think the underlying unit should define the steps with
Control/Shift: I viewed them as going min to max in a given number of
keypress/repeats irrespective of the quantisation. If it is not done as a
fraction of the full throw of a control then it might just end up as being
another arbitrary set of definitions?

> > 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.
>
> A good attitude to have :)
>
> > There are diverse other issues that might need to be considered such
> > as
> > how to handle lin vs log controls?
>

Glad you said that. I prefer the GUI to have equal steps. The backend
needs to decide if they have to be lin/log.

Regards, nick.
                                               

_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Received on Fri Nov 25 00:15:01 2011