Re: [LAU] control surface design - was - Jack transport

On Wed, 13 Aug 2014, Fons Adriaensen wrote:

> On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 11:13:41AM -0700, Len Ovens wrote:
>
>> OSC vs. MIDI
> Ther result is that any control surface or similar device
> needs to be programmable, and whatever is done with it will
> be ad-hoc.

That is what I am seeing.

> It would be possible to define some standards, e.g. for
> transport control. But unless they are
>
> * very strictly defined, and those definitions are
> enforced in some way,
>
> * and the standard is designed to be as universal as
> possible, without making assumptions or including
> things that are correct only 99% of the time,

That would be MIDI.

> any such standards are destined to fail.

Concidering OSC has been around for 12 years(v1.0, 17 years since first
implementation), it may have already. The specification is the most
non-specific thing I have ever seen. From the home page it seems to have
not moved at all from 2009 (waiting for funding so 1.1 can be released).
It would seem almost the same thing could be done with an ssh session
using arbitrary strings.

--
Len Ovens
www.ovenwerks.net
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user