10 Apr
2013
10 Apr
'13
2:25 p.m.
cool,
good for me. n
Le 10/04/13 11:31, Marco Donnarumma a écrit :
hey all,
http://piratepad.net/pPEAhgQS00
I just made some edit (in dark violet). I also copied the previous text below.
It looks good for me, I simply reformulated some sentences, trying to make it extremely clear.
let me know, cheers!
-- Marco Donnarumma New Media + Sonic Arts Practitioner, Performer, Teacher, Director. Embodied Audio-Visual Interaction Research Team. Department of Computing, Goldsmiths University of London
Portfolio: http://marcodonnarumma.com Research: http://res.marcodonnarumma.com Director: http://www.liveperformersmeeting.net On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 3:30 PM, Marco Donnarumma <devel@thesaddj.com <mailto:devel@thesaddj.com>> wrote: hey, I'm touring in Poland until next week. I'll take a look when I'm back on monday 8th, if that's not too late. cheers, M -- Marco Donnarumma New Media + Sonic Arts Practitioner, Performer, Teacher, Director. Embodied Audio-Visual Interaction Research Team. Department of Computing, Goldsmiths University of London ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Portfolio: http://marcodonnarumma.com Research: http://res.marcodonnarumma.com Director: http://www.liveperformersmeeting.net On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 6:02 PM, András Murányi <muranyia@gmail.com <mailto:muranyia@gmail.com>> wrote: OK, I've made a light review. It would be nice if other people took a look too before we settle on it. András On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 6:40 PM, Nicolas Montgermont <nicolas_montgermont@yahoo.fr <mailto:nicolas_montgermont@yahoo.fr>> wrote: hello all, it should be nice to have any opinion on that. It's been nearly two months now. you can edit directly online or comment here. Best, n Le 26/01/13 10:37, Nicolas Montgermont a écrit : > updated once agin: > http://piratepad.net/pPEAhgQS00 > > i've kept the old version down there for comparison, and > eventually to cancel the corrections I've made. > Please edit directly or comment, correct! > best, > n > > Le 24/01/13 11:19, Nicolas Montgermont a écrit : >> >> Le 23/01/13 20:16, András Murányi a écrit : >>> I think the first paragraph is lovely and we shall keep >>> it as it is, to avoid extra iterations. >>> I don't wholeheartedly agree with the rewrite of the >>> 2nd paragraph: >> I think as well it must be corrected. >>> the points about pd being free and being available in >>> source are missing now, >> I agree for free. For the sources, as the first line of >> the text says it's an open source software, I am not >> sure it's necessary. >>> as well as a the point that pd-extended is more than >>> vanilla+externals but it's also patched. >> I don't think it's specially relevant when you want to >> explain Pd-extended in one line. >>> Also, afaik, vanilla is not "written by" Miller but >>> rather "maintained" by him as it contains code from >>> various authors. >> please edit, I think it's just a question of adding >> "mainly" somewhere. >>> So, at the end, I personally prefer how this >>> paragraphed looked before the last commit. >>> All this work being quite subjective (as it is free >>> text not program code) *please* give some >>> reasons/rationale when you make change changes: why did >>> you do what you did, what is the improvement? Otherwise >>> we might just keep changing until the end of times :o) >> You are right: >> What I wanted to do here is trying to equilibrate the >> informations. I think it's much more relevant for a >> newcomer to know what is PD vs Pd extended, than to know >> Pd is available for IRIX. For me the text is more >> looking like a technical explanation around Pd, than an >> introduction to the Pd universe. For example, GEM was >> not mentionned once in the whole text, but cyclone was. >> In the end, it is more an introduction for developpers, >> than for users. What I think we must correct. It's a >> matter of balancing the informations, and to start from >> the beginning. >>> I don't think we need the extra paragraph about >>> graphical programming, but a picture of an actual patch >>> would tell a lot (without words). >> I disagree. The whole point of Pd is patching, but the >> word is only used once in the text in the sentence: >> It is easy to extend Pd by nesting reusable patches >> ("abstractions") or by utilising object classes >> ("externals"). >> >> No words are written on what is a patch. And I think >> it's totally fundamental. >>> I don't support mixing the 3rd and the 4th paragraph >>> either - they are two different points (extendability, >>> history). >> If you want. IMHO, Pd extendability can be introduced in >> a sentence where Pd basic usage needs a paragraph. Max >> explanations worth a look for comparisons with pd's: >> http://cycling74.com/whatismax/ >> >> >> I think as well the sentence from the 4th paragraph: >> The core of Pd (aka Pd Vanilla) is written and >> maintained by Miller Puckette and includes the work of >> many developers, making the whole package very much a >> community effort. >> >> is redundant now. >> >> It should be nice to have other opinions on all that? >> We are close to publishing :) >> Best, >> n >> >> >> -- >> http://nim.on.free.fr >> >> > _______________________________________________ Pdweb mailing list Pdweb@iem.at <mailto:Pdweb@iem.at> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pdweb _______________________________________________ Pdweb mailing list Pdweb@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pdweb