From: Rich E reakinator@gmail.com To: IOhannes m zmoelnig zmoelnig@iem.at Cc: pd-dev@iem.at Sent: Monday, June 4, 2012 12:59 PM Subject: Re: [PD-dev] [ pure-data-Feature Requests-3531000 ] Proposal for an alternative file format
On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 2:52 AM, IOhannes m zmoelnig zmoelnig@iem.at wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 2012-06-03 22:30, s p wrote:
That's a very good point, ... it's a good idea to specify GUI infos, for better interoperability, but it should be explicitly said that this is optional information
gui information (e.g. spatial layout) is not always optional, sometimes it is mandatory (as in: the patch's behaviour depends on the layout)
The spatial layout dictates what connections are made, but in the .pd, doesn't this remark (from puredata.info's docs on connect) still hold true?:
"Objects are virtually numbered in order of appearance in the file, starting from zero. Inlets and outlets of the objects are numbered likewise."
What I'm trying to say is, the patch is reconstructed based on the order of elements within the .pd file (the proposal suggests using id's in .json). I'm I correct in assuming that spatial location is used by pd to write the patch, but its only use when reading the patch is to decide where it should be drawn?
See [inlet] and [outlet].
Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev