On Sat, 30 Apr 2016 20:30:44 +0200 Christopher Arndt <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Because patches are more than the parameter data, or at least they > should be, IMHO. The metadata, apart from the bank, slot, name and > category should contain author, creation and modification time, > arbitrary tags and usage info (e.g. which controllers do what). Hmmm.. not sure if that info is relevant. This said, looking at a real world case, u-he, if someone make a patch set, then he can organise it in the file system such as: Hollow Padsheaven 3 Bells & Ambients Soft & Warm Plucked Sweeps Leads & Dark Rythmic > Also, the file system only has a hierarchical structure, one dimension > to categorize patches. There's no technical reason why a patch > shouldn't have (be in) several categories and be listed in both, or > why a patch browser shouldn't support "virtual" banks with "links" to > your favorite sounds from different banks, categories, authors and so > forth. Yes, this is the "tags" notion that can be found for instance in Bitwig. That"s something else, and not sure, IMHO, if it os that much useful. I certainly do not use it yet. When I do something, I put the tag "mystuff" and that"s it, which can be translated to a filesystem easily. _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
