On Wednesday 10 December 2003 21:56, Rolf Dubitzky wrote:
> On Wednesday 10 December 2003 13:17, Jason Wood wrote:
> > So piave would recieve :
> >
> > <render url="some/url/to/file.dv">
> > <outstream>
> > <file>
> > <container format="rawdv" />
> > </file>
> > <outstream>
> > </render>
>
> I would put the filename into the file tag, not the render tag. Also you
> need to keep in mind, that piave can not rely on kioslaves, so it is not
> valid to send actually urls to piave, but it is anyway reasonable to call
> the attribute url.
Oops, my mistake - kdenlive already uses "filename" as the attribute tag name.
when calling render.
> > Does that sound reasonable? I am wondering if the <outstream> tag is
> > redundant or not - could we just have this :
> >
> > <render url="some/url/to/file.dv">
> > <file>
> > <container format="rawdv" />
> > </file>
> > </render>
> >
> > or does this lose some of the semantics?
>
> ;-) Well, fro my point of view the 'render' tag is redundant, since piave
> will send what ever is in the following scenelist to an outstream. piave is
> a renderer so to give it a tag 'render' is redundant, there is nothing else
> a renderer would do anyway ;-) So stcking with your example I would
> suggest something like:
>
> <outstream>
> <file url="some/url/to/file.dv">
> <container format="rawdv" />
> </file>
> </outstream>
Does piave treat rendering a scenelist to a file in the same way as playing a
scenelist to a video window? If that is the case, then it might be that we
don't need a render command at all, but need an improved command for
specifying the output device to use.
e.g. instead of calling "render" to render to a file, we do something like :
<addOutStream>
<outstream>
<file filename="">
<container format="libdv" />
</file>
</outstream>
</addOutStream>
<play/>
And to play a file to screen, we do something like this :
<addOutStream>
<outstream>
<video type="xv"/>
</outstream>
</addOutStream>
<play/>
How does this sound?
Cheers,
Jason
--
Jason Wood
Homepage : www.uchian.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk
