On 2/27/07, Pieter Palmers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Loki Davison wrote:
> On 2/27/07, Pieter Palmers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Leonard Ritter wrote:
>> > On Thu, 2007-02-22 at 06:42 -0600, Jan Depner wrote:
>> >> I can say that the QT package is much easier to use and has
>> >> better documentation and support. Not that GTK is terrible, it's just
>> >> not as polished or professional.
>> >
>> > the enemy of the good is the better.
>> >
>> > i, for one, used the past 3 days to write a python module named
>> > "audiogui", which provides widgets to mimick the look and feel of
>> > traditional audio hardware panels (i dare you to start an audio ui
>> > design war with me). it will be the base for providing an engine which
>> > renders panels from stylesheets, to be used with plugins of aldrin -
>> but
>> > of course that whole thing could be connected to an OSC library and
>> > control any DSSI host.
>> now that sounds cool... sort of a widget system specific for audio
>> control gui's.
>>
>
> wow... a sort of widget system for audio gui's....
> http://phat.berlios.de http://khagan.berlios.de
The "renders panels from stylesheets" is what I am referring to. Phat is
has very nice widgets, but AFAIK it stops before the container level.
That's where the widget 'system' comes in: a system that manages widgets
such that you don't have to care about that. Just write a UI description
and have the system generate the UI for you (at run time).
That would allow to concentrate on the coding and have someone else
figure out the best UI layout. Or have people customize their layout.
Pieter
I kinda thought that's what khagan does. Allows users to build there
own UI or let a layout designer build it. Thus why i gave both links.
Loki
