On 18.04.2009 15:36, Luca Olivetti wrote: > On Sat, 18 Apr 2009 13:28:24 +0200 > Udo Richter<udo_richter@xxxxxx> wrote: > >> This is mostly what the VDR skin interface already provides: A >> semantically structured description of the interface. Most skins >> translate this into a bitmapped OSD view, but they don't have to. The >> skincurses plugin for example uses the text console. VDR itself never >> uses the OSD directly, only through the two standard skins. > > That only works if the default vdr menu layout (i.e. a simple > name:value list) fits your needs. > If you need a different layout you have to draw directly to the osd > (with the side effect that the skincurses plugin won't work). Sure. But as I said: VDR only uses the skin interface. Plugins do use the OSD directly, but currently expect it to be bitmapped. Vectorized structures could be provided by custom skins using plugin-to-plugin communications. IMHO a bitmapped interface is a good compromise of flexibility and simplicity, while vectorized systems tend to be quite complex. (think of XUL (mozilla) or XAML (microsoft).) However, there's no reason why, for example, a plugin like text2skin could not provide advanced rendering to other plugins. Cheers, Udo _______________________________________________ vdr mailing list vdr@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
