On Sat, 2006-04-22 at 10:53 +0100, Steve Harris wrote: > Almost two years ago at the LA conference a bunch of us agreed that > something need to be done to improve LADSPA, and on the approximate > direction it should take. > > Anyway, I finally got round to making a sketch plugin and .h file: > http://plugin.org.uk/ladspa2/
Nice. The header and the plugin code really looks a lot cleaner without all the metadata embedded in it. > The data is in the amp.ttl file (it's in Turtle > http://www.dajobe.org/2004/01/turtle/ an easy to hand-write RDF syntax). > We could mandate a particular syntax for the spec. It looks a lot nicer than the XML syntax. > Overall I think this is a much better approach than LADSPA 1.x, it has > usable identifiers, a clear route for extensions without compatibility > problems and each plugin is quite a lot simpler. What type of extensions are you talking about here, and what is the clear route? -- Lars Luthman PGP key: http://www.student.nada.kth.se/~d00-llu/pgp_key.php Fingerprint: FCA7 C790 19B9 322D EB7A E1B3 4371 4650 04C7 7E2E
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
