[gmpi] Re: 3.14 UIs
- From: Paul Davis <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: gmpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 13:41:57 -0400
>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.
>
>GMPI is strictly INTRA-host.
you're wrong. its as simple as that :)
By adopting this idea of support remote guis with a standardized
Remote GUI Host (RGH), we would instantly create an inter-host (D-Host
<=> RG-host) design. GMPI has to address that or there is no point in
adopting the RGH idea at all. Or almost no point.
The point of the remote (G)UI proposal (host or otherwise) is that I,
Joe and Jane User, want to run my (G)UIs on a system that is not the
one running the DSP Host. What type of system that is should not be
decided by EmApple or anyone else.
"Why?" you ask - they control which system you can run the DSP host
and the DSP plugin on, so what's the difference?
The difference is that I can't (re)write the plugin, but I can
write/engineer a (G)UI for the plugin, because GMPI defines how to
control a plugin. I can therefore create a system that works the way
*I* want it to work rather than the way EmApple (or whoever) want it
to work.
If I was happy with the latter option, I wouldn't bother writing
Ardour :)
--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
Other related posts:
