[linux-audio-user] sf2 soundfont spec license

Christoph Eckert mchristoph.eckert at t-online.de
Fri Mar 11 17:52:15 EST 2005


Hi,


> Why not start it then?  Even if you're not a coder, you can
> start drafting the requirements and a human level
> specification.

well, to be honest, I'm not a coder, and I'm not familiar 
enough with sampling to create specs. Sounds as a wiki would 
be helpful.

> Forget XML, packing and whatknot and just 
> describe, hierarchically or otherwise, what the file should
> contain.

XML is hip, nothing else :) .

Anyway, maybe it's wrong for a sampling format, but otherwise 
the advantage is that it is easily human readable as well as 
machine creatable.

Just some hours before I read that there are people who'd like 
to create soundfonts automatically on remote machines; so the 
new format should be able to be created via shell scripts as 
well as defined easily be blind users or GUI frontends. So I 
guessed that XML isn't the least choice.

> Even if you are a coder, don't always jump for XML.  While
> it's certainly human readable, it's often about as easy to
> read as a postscript file (also human readable).

This depends on the format. XML is a syntax or markup; you're 
right, there are XML files which are not very human readable. 
But we can do it better :) .

> Anyway, my suggestion is: get the ball rolling.  Once it's
> specced, all that's needed is a library for processing the
> file and it would be a fairly simple job to make things
> like fluid work with the new format.

I'm not that optimistic, but maybe I'm wrong.


 Best regards


    ce




More information about the Linux-audio-user mailing list