[gmpi] Re: low level API
- From: Steve Harris <S.W.Harris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: gmpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2005 00:33:16 +0000
On Fri, Feb 04, 2005 at 01:56:46 -0800, Tim Hockin wrote:
> While I did conced it before, I'm still excited by the prospect of
> dropping the external metadata requirement and adding something like the
> above.
I really have no idea why the idea of external metadata gets you worked
up, internal metadata is considered really bad practice in the metadata
world. When its done, its usally done as a hack to work with legacy
systems (eg. EXIF). The really successful metadata systems of the last 10
years, that you probably use every day (wether you know it or not) are all
external. e.g RDF, RSS, VCal/Card, FOAF and even the MIME that tags this
mail.
I would have a similar reaction to a bunch of metadata people turning up
and telling us we should all be using 16bit unsigned ints for our plugins
because thier faster to processes!
> Note: your plugin's query method could open and read an XML file, if you
> wanted it to. But the host API would be structured in-memory data, not
> unparsed on-disk data.
Thats pointless. The gmpi library can provide calls to give you parsed
binary data from the metadata files if thats what you want.
Can you explain why you think its better to have metadata internal to the
DLL?
- 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:
