[gmpi] Re: MIDI: Common event coding
- From: Steve Harris <S.W.Harris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: gmpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2004 22:22:53 +0100
On Wed, Jun 23, 2004 at 11:52:36 -0700, Chris Grigg wrote:
> Steve said:
> >On Wed, Jun 23, 2004 at 10:31:55 -0700, Tim Hockin wrote:
> >> This is partly why I dislike the idea of stapling MIDI onto events. If
> >> the GMPI protocol is well designed, it's not needed, and is just a
> >> crutch. Ever seen a (young) music student go through his sheet music and
> >> write the note names under the notes? He never learns to read music very
> >> well. Not that I know that young oboe player, or anything :)
> >
> >Right, I dont think its the sort of thing that plugins should depend on.
> >Though, IIRC Chris descibed it as "optional" sould it would presumably be
> >a bug if a plugin depended on it? Still seems a bit odd.
>
> No, it would be a feature. 8-)
>
> This is how MIDI routing and MIDI processors would work inside the
> GMPI graph. For events that originate as MIDI, hosts that expose
> MIDI into the graph should staple the original MIDI to the expanded
> message, until and unless the two side come un-sync'd.
But if you process the MIDI side only then they have just become unsync'd,
and if you need to process both then why have the stapled MIDI at all?
I'm not sure what it achieves.
- Steve
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
