Subject: Re: [linux-audio-user] png graphics library for sound apps
From: iriXx (m@irixx.org)
Date: Tue Jan 28 2003 - 03:59:32 EET
it sounds very interesting indeed... unfortunately its well beyond my
skills as im a graphic designer but not a programmer... i dont know
anything except the very bare basics of xml....
i'd love to try working with something designed along these principles
though...
m~
>>i've used Live... do you mean their use of abstracted, symbol-like icons
>>intsead of realistic looking knobs?...
>
>
> Sort of... I'm thinking along slightly different lines though.
>
> {I've actually been giving this a good deal of thought over the past
> hour or so.}
>
> If you were to define some sort of grid or matrix in xml so as to
> provide folk with a lot of empty spaces to fill with plugins {engines,
> sounds and so forth} and then go back and define a symbol for each of
> those spaces {function, sound, type of connection} giving some thought
> to syntax and function within the matrix {possibly extending this into
> other dimensions at some point} you'd have the beginnings of a sort of
> universal {electronic} musical language/application.
>
> Keeping things simple and iconic would allow you to redefine and extend
> things {you might take a look at this:
>
> http://www.gnu.org/software/octal/ox_api_main/index.html The guy that
> put this page up originally mentioned something to the effect that
> electronic music required a new language...what we have now not being
> altogether suited {as well as being a bit limiting} ...to illustrating
> electronic musical concepts {We need to be able to represent them quite
> differently... a stream of characters {a custom font} or flowcharted or
> placed on a 3 dimensional grid, etc...}
>
> It would be much easier for folk to simply build grid elements so you
> could extend or modify or replace specific parts and functions of the
> grid than to remake the entire thing every time one wanted to create a
> new application. {form being massively tied to function here} All you'd
> need to do would be string together different elements of it. Arts and
> Octal and Gnome-Think and pd and buzz, etc already have a sort of
> framework in place for organizing information this way... I think what
> we need is an object catalog... a language. It needs to be universal and
> standardized. Symbols need to be defined for specific modules so as to
> make things easly understandable. It's a higher level method of
> organizing high level concepts.
>
> I think it probaby needs to be moved into the third and possibly 4th
> dimension as well. Otherwise it's going to get to be really difficult to
> keep the relationships between functions clear.
>
> So.. yeah... abstracted and symbol-like is more appropriate. 3
> dimensional with some means of representing placement in time are
> probably good too.
>
>
>
>
>
-- iriXx www.iriXx.orgcopyleft: creativity, technology and freedom? info@copyleftmedia.org.uk www.copyleftmedia.org.uk
_ ( ) ascii ribbon against html email X / \ cat /dev/sda1 > /dev/dsp
*** stopping make sense ***
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Tue Jan 28 2003 - 04:03:35 EET