>On Mon, Jun 07, 2004 at 09:57:03AM +0100, Steve Harris wrote: >> If the protocol is not standardised then it reduces the flexibility >> - no UIs that span hosts, no hardware control surfaces that connect >> directly to the host over ethernet, running UIs on machines with a >> different OS becomes hard, etc. > >I don't see at ALL how this follows. UIs span hosts because each host has >it's own RGH (which hosts a GMPI-GUI plugin) and protocol. No! the RGH runs on the platform where the control i/o happens - the control surface, the windows front-end to the render farm, the machine on the other side of the world, wherever. the DSP-host cannot supply the RGH without it just becoming basically redundant: "Hi, my name is TheFirstSHowing from Abode Software, and I come with an RGH for the exact same platforms that I run on". [:)] This would destroy 50% of the idea of the remote GUI - you could never run a GUI on a platform not supported by the DSP host (even if the plugin and/or its GUI were available for other platforms). --p ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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