On Thu, 2011-03-24 at 22:22 +0530, Arun Raghavan wrote: > On Thu, 2011-03-24 at 13:07 +0000, Colin Guthrie wrote: > > 'Twas brillig, and Maarten Bosmans at 24/03/11 12:44 did gyre and gimble: > > > 2011/3/24 Maarten Bosmans <mkbosmans at gmail.com>: > > >> With this you can specify the volume with 6554, 10%, 0.001 or -60dB, > > >> all resulting in the same volume change. > > > > > > I was also going to add relative volumes, such as +3dB and -5%, by > > > detecting a + or - sign in the volume. But that clashes with the > > > absolute dB scale (insofar a dB can ever be absolute) that can also be > > > negative. > > > > > > Any suggestions for graceful handling of this? > > > > How about if the first letter of the volume change is an "i" or a "d" > > then this indicated increment or decrement relative volume? > > > > It's not as clean as the +/- labelling sadly but such is life. > > > > Alternatively your absolute dB volumes could be specified as "60-dB" or > > "7+dB" (where 7dB implies "7+dB")... That way the prefix +/- notation > > could be used for relative adjustments. The only downside there is that > > setting absolute dB volumes is more confusing (you'd never need to use > > anything other than XdB for relative adjustments anyway). > > > > Personally I'd go for the later as I think relative adjustments are > > probably more common, so it's syntax should be "neatest", but I could be > > very wrong :D > > Or maybe just do this as a separate set-volume-step command (or > -increment or something better named)? I agree - I think a separate command is a good idea. For command naming, I suggest "increase-sink-volume" and "decrease-sink-volume". -- Tanu
