[LAD] [ANN] LV2 beta3

[Dave Robillard]

On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 13:28 -0400, Thomas Vecchione wrote:
> Gonna answer several posts with this I think in the interest of 
> simplicity as I tihnk I was misunderstood somewhat....
> 
> Lars:
> 
> > You could have meta-extensions that were simply a collection of other
> > extensions. "To support this extension, a host must support extensions
> > A, B, and C". Or something like that.
> 
> Definitely a possibility, that is exactly what I was referring to with 
> 'Profiles'.  For example an Audio-Instrument profile might support XYZ 
> while a Video Profile might support others, as if I recall correctly 
> part of the point of LV2 was to support not just audio but possibly 
> other things as well?  A GUI profile might be another one(Not saying it 
> is a good idea, just providing possible examples)?
> 
> Whatever the case of how that is handled, simplicity for the user as 
> well as the programmer needs to be considered.  Even the profiles 
> mentioned above would add complexity in for the end user though.

I don't really see the point of these "profiles" at all, to be honest.
Seems like just defining things for the sake of defining things.

> Unfortunatly that has nothing to do with my concern though.  The problem 
> isn't that hosts won't list the plugin, it is that a plguin that works 
> here in program X, and I like the plugin but maybe not the program, 
> doesn't work here because a host y has not done that particular extension.
> 
> It could be looked at as the job of the programmer to support the 
> extension, but then you are adding complexity into the programmer's 
> lives as well by making them follow every custom extension to support 
> all these great plugins.

The perspective of this argument is getting a bit hand wavey.  It's
really quite simple:  there are "extra" features you can use/create/etc.

Either a plugin author supports these features, or not.
Either a host author supports these features, or not.

Either way, everything just works (or not) as it should.

I understand the idea of "plugin A doesn't work in host B" is maybe
unnerving at first glance, but you're looking at it from a strange
perspective and trying to come up with solutions to a problem that
simply doesn't exist.

To pick an obvious example, consider GUIs:

Host H is a command line app, and doesn't support GUIs.
Plugin P is a plugin with an optional GUI.
Plugin G is a plugin with a mandatory GUI (silly example, yes).

P works in H, P's GUI doesn't.
G doesn't work in H.

Of course GUIs don't work in H - it doesn't support GUIs!  There is no
problem here...

-DR-