On Sunday 14 September 2014 10:21:16 you wrote: > On Sun, Sep 14, 2014 at 10:14 AM, David Baron <d_baron@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Sunday 14 September 2014 09:59:10 you wrote: > > > On Sun, Sep 14, 2014 at 9:56 AM, David Baron <d_baron@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Sunday 14 September 2014 09:25:01 Paul Davis wrote: > > > > > On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 4:15 PM, Russell Hanaghan < > > > > > > > > > > hanaghan.osaudio@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > Hmm, $60us by the looks? Not too much money by any means if it > > > > works > > > > > > > > reliably. > > > > > > > > > > > > Just curious if any devs are into writing something simple? I can > > > > > > > > provide > > > > > > > > > > testing assistance only. Just sounds like a cool and relative > > > > thing to > > > > > > > > have > > > > > > in the open source world. > > > > > > > > > > when it comes to translating from one DAW format to another, there > > > > is no > > > > > > > such thing as "simple". > > > > > > > > > > the people behind AATranslator are a veritable font of knowledge > > > > about > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > stuff, and it cannot be stressed enough how much work they have done > > > > and > > > > > > > how much they have had to discover. > > > > > > > > > > no other attempt at such a tool has ever succeeded - there was one > > > > other > > > > > > > tool which Solid State purchased but its existence now seems hard to > > > > > > > > spot. > > > > > > > > Yep. I had tried to start an openDAW discussion/project a few years > > > > back, > > > > > > with > > > > a common XML-based intermediary referencing pcm files/segments. The > > > > existence > > > > of a proprietary-binary "AAF" library was called to my attention with > > > > some > > > > > > intent of releasing a XML/text based version. A few DAW programs > > > > support > > > > > > AAF. > > > > Have not heard much since. > > > > __________________________ > > > > > > AAF is actually a relatively open specification BUT > > > > > > * it has every hallmark of design-by-committee > > > * it is vastly more centered on broadcast and video than on typical > > > > DAW > > > > > scenarios > > > > > > * the spec includes an explicit dependence on Microsoft "structured > > > > > > storage format", > > > > > > which is essentially a filesystem-in-a-file, and this part is > > > > > > somewhat opaque > > > > > > although there are attempts at an open source implementation > > > > > > I wouldn't put a minute of my time into AAF support. It is a dinosaur, > > > in > > > every sense of that word. > > > > So maybe it is time to invent a new one. What I had in mind was something > > like > > what Cakewalk has, but open, XML-based, hand-editable. PCM segments would > > be > > the only thing that HAD to be binary. MIDI could be done binary as well or > > XML > > (there are already schemas for such). > > http://xkcd.com/927/ Very cute. However, there are no real standards. Each program, opensource or not, has its own system and ne'er the 'twain do meet. So one restricts to one program, no other choice. Microsoft is so big so makes its own standards, its own rules, changes them at will (example rtf), but they are not in the DAW business. Just many programs run on their platform so may use some of their file-structures. What if the programs we use here, on this list, were inter-operable? Ardour/Harrison, Qtractor, Muse, Rosegarden, etc. We have more choices than does Microsoft. What if Tracktion (proprietary, now supporting Linux!) were brought on board? I do not think it is so far-fetched if there be a will to do so. One opensource library to service this, done once. (I no longer have my old posts, proposals for this. Discussion was a while back.) _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
