[linux-audio-dev] Re: Language fanboys [was Re: light C++ set for WAV]

[lazzaro]

On Jul 24, 2006, at 1:39 PM, linux-audio-dev- 
request at music.columbia.edu wrote:

> what about applying the journal data to an OSC-over-UDP stream. the  
> journal data could be encapsulated in OSC. sounds like a paper and  
> liblo patch waiting to happen ;)


Personally, my suggestion is that the community starts by
defining OSC profiles for specific classes of gestural input
and synthesis methods that are widely used in the community.
These profiles should standardize syntax and semantics.  If
you are working on a music project that is doing something
that fits a profile, use the profile.  Otherwise, do as you do today.

If OSC goes down this route, one can imagine developing a
recovery-journal system with recovery semantics for all the
standard profiles.  Part of developing a new OSC profile would
be defining the recovery journal for the profile.

The least of the benefits of a design like this would be
network resiliency. The big win is by defining OSC profiles
with semantics, it starts to make sense to create a hardware
or software synth that "understands OSC profile X" out of
the box, in the same way a synth understands MIDI.  And
you can also create mass-market controller hardware that
"puts out OSC data using profile X".  And so, you can
connect the two boxes up and get plug and play -- just
like MIDI.

---
John Lazzaro
http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~lazzaro
lazzaro [at] cs [dot] berkeley [dot] edu
---