[gmpi] Re: Use case scenario for Control Parameters vs MIDI in GMPI
- From: Steve Harris <S.W.Harris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: gmpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 15:57:54 +0100
On Wed, Jun 16, 2004 at 04:52:02 +0200, Sebastien Metrot wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I've been following the MIDI vs No Midi argument (should I say flame war?).
> I understand the points that have been made so far and I would
> personally think the "Control Parameters defined as a superset of MIDI"
> would be the best solution.
> However I need a clarification from the brains on this list about the
> way one the the very basic features of most morden plugins can work:
> Our users want to be able to easily link their control surface elements
> to our plugins parameters. What most plugins out there do is let the
> user select the corresponding knob (right click + menu, or double click
> like reason, whatever...) and link the NEXT incomming midi message as
> the source of events for this params. I feel this kind of flexibility is
This is exactly the kind of thing its designed to support. The difference
is that the host would do the MIDI->GMPI mapping, not the plugin.
Generally the plugin can tell the host what mapping it wants, and in this
case it would need some magic bind_next() style call. The host can also
support a generic UI, where you can select a control from a list and bind
that way, so the plugin can ignore it completly and still get MIDI
bindings.
- 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:
