[LAD] State of Plugin API's

Gabriel M. Beddingfield gabriel at teuton.org
Sun Nov 1 17:51:05 UTC 2009

On Sun, 1 Nov 2009, David Robillard wrote:

> But nobody needed to define MIDI+MMC and MIDI+MTC and MIDI+MMC1 and MIDI
> +MMC2 and MIDI+MMC1+MTC and MIDI+MMC2+MTC and ... for people to make
> sense of the whole thing, did they? :)

Yes and No.  Manufacturers are required to publish their MIDI 
Implementation so that the person buying the device would know what types 
of MIDI messages the device sends and responds to.  This includes the 
summarized table and the down-to-each-sysex-bit documentation.  If you 
know you want an MMC-capable device, you know to look here.

If you don't want to do LV2-EXtremeMakeover-HomeEdition or LV2-El33t, then 
perhaps a concise table with a standardized format might work better for 

Or even a just a standardized way of saying it.  Something more clear and 
concise than "Foomatic-LV2 depends on the URI Map extension and the MIDI 
Ports extension [exactly /who/ is supposed to supply these?].  And, oh 
yeah, we forgot to tell you about the dynparam extension... but I'm sure 
you'll figure that out when things don't work."


More information about the Linux-audio-dev mailing list