[OSC_dev] Everyone Invited - SYNoscopy

[salsaman at xs4all.nl]

On Tue, December 16, 2008 10:13, Gaspard Bucher wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 12:32 AM,  <salsaman at xs4all.nl> wrote:
>> On Mon, December 15, 2008 23:19, werteplus at gmail.com wrote:
>>> Come here for helping to work on a proposal of a STANDARD NAMESPACE for
>>> controlling SYNTHs and SEQUENCERs.
>>>
>>> http://synosc.wetpaint.com/
>>>
>>> Everyone is invited, I will add everyone who wants to take part here!
>>>
>>> greetings,
>>> fabb
>>>
>>> ps: *ad* Yes, we need YOUR opinion *ad*.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> OSC_dev mailing list
>>> OSC_dev at create.ucsb.edu
>>> http://lists.create.ucsb.edu/mailman/listinfo/osc_dev
>>>
>>
>> I think it would be best if we stick to one "hello" protocol. Maybe you
>> could take a look at the proposal on openmediacontrol.wetpaint.com, I
>> have
>> some tried and working suggestions there.
>>
>>
>>
>> Also, I am curious to know how you support variables in the namespace,
>> for
>> example ID1 and ID2.
>>
>> In all of the OSC code I have seen, only constant namespaces can be
>> used.
>> How do you for example, create an OSC branch with a variable namespace.
>> And if you link this to a callback, how does the callback know the value
>> of the variable part(s) of the message ?
>
> I am implementing a patcher that will be totally osc addressable
> (every node, every method, every inlet). To do this I build a tree
> with the objects. When an object's name changes, its url changes. What
> you call a "callback" is implemented through a hash of "url" -> object
> and every object responds to the C++ virtual "trigger". You can look
> at the code (MIT licence):
> http://github.com/rubyk/rubyk/tree/master/rubyk/src/core/object.h.
>

Interesting. Are you planning a C interface also, or will you stick to C++
only ?


> Anyway, I would be glad to join in the discussion on openmediacontrol,
> since the "rubyk" protocol (way of addressing nodes, methods, get/set
> parameters, create/destroy) is going to be used both in the multimedia
> patcher (replacement for max/MSP/Jitter), the interface and some
> custom hardware (embedded), I think it needs to be robust and well
> thought.
>

Right. Yes please join in the discussion. A standard is badly needed -
even within my own application there are conflicting syntaxes used, which
makes it difficult to expand the commandset.


> We are currently all bumping into the fact that OSC is a *partial*
> standard. It says how to adresse methods, but that's about it. Those
> of us building tools that need to interact smoothly with one another
> need some standard ways to get return values, get/set parameters, etc.
>

Right again. This is precisely what is needed.

As a minimum we should have:

- a standard for getting/setting/querying values

- standard for getting/setting parameters (including where there can be a
variable number of parameters of various types)

- a "hello" standard for unknown applications

- a method of capability discovery with some standardised methods

- possibly, standard notifications for events (for example, frame_synch
for video, packet_synch for audio)




> In order to clarify this common set of features, I suggest using
> wikipedia: no one needs yet another login, it has a good history
> feature and a place for discussion. I know wikipedia is not exactly
> the right place for this, but opensoundcontrol.org does not offer the
> features we need.
>
> Please join in (thanks for using the discussion in case of disagreement):
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenSound_Control#Proposal_for_common_behaviors
>


Please lets have a single discussion venue, which I propose be

http://openmediacontrol.wetpaint.com

Regards,
Salsaman.
http://lives.sf.net