[gmpi] Re: 3.14 UIs
- From: Tim Hockin <thockin@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: gmpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 13:56:23 -0700
On Mon, Jun 07, 2004 at 06:35:05PM +0100, Steve Harris wrote:
> > If we say that it must be OSC, we're forcing that design decision on every
> > host that wants a remote gui. BUt that decision has nothing to do with
> > the plugin API, it's an inter-host API.
>
> It's just an alternative to specifying the IPC API used to talk back to the
> host, and I can't see how its more restrictive to say "use this protocol"
> (which can have any API you like layered over it) than "use this API".
I'm saying that the remote UI<->host protocol is not our business. We
don't say it is OSC, we don't define some other IPC, we just don't touch
it. We say that it is possible, and we suggest OSC. We may go so far as
to spec an OSC protocol for it. But we can't require it.
> > GMPI is strictly INTRA-host.
>
> Well, intra-(host+plugin+ui) yes. It would be nice to support, in a host
> independent way, UIs running on different machines from plugins though.
The whole remote-UI things is a side-effect of deciding that UI and DSP
are nto tightly coupled. All this that we're spending time on is moot.
There are a bazillion cool things you can do with the UI and DSP
decoupled. Standardizing those will be useful, but is *not* part of GMPI,
I think.
I think...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Generalized Music Plugin Interface (GMPI) public discussion list
Participation in this list is contingent upon your abiding by the
following rules: Please stay on topic. You are responsible for your own
words. Please respect your fellow subscribers. Please do not
redistribute anyone else's words without their permission.
Archive: //www.freelists.org/archives/gmpi
Email gmpi-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx w/ subject "unsubscribe" to unsubscribe
Other related posts:
