[Jsynthlib-devel] Ideas for XML patchfile format...

[Joe E. <jo...@em...>]

I'm starting work on saving patch libraries to XML format instead of the 
serialization format.

What file extension do we want to use for this new file type (since we 
don't want it to be confiused with the *.patchlib ones)? "JPL" (for "JSL 
Patch Library"), "JLB" (for "JSL LiBrary"), or do we not want a 3-char 
extension and want something like ".library", or ".patches"?

Next, anybody want to discuss format? Right now, I'm figuring on 
something like:
<patchlib>
  <patch>
    <name>My First Patch</name>
    <comment>Probably a Alesis patch. Size=1324</comment>
    <sysexData encoding="base64" >
      AHKLKASFLKASFNMWKLRJWQLKQWHWOIQWUE...
      ...
    </sysexData>
  </patch>
</patchlib>

Although, if there will only be one name and one comment, then we can 
make them attributes instead of elements:
<patchlib>
  <patch name="My First Patch" comment="Probably a Alesis patch. 
Size=1324" >
    <sysexData encoding="base64" >
      AHKLKASFLKASFNMWKLRJWQLKQWHWOIQWUE...
      ...
    </sysexData>
  </patch>
</patchlib>

The type (single,bank, etc.) and the particular device they belong to 
don't need to be stored because JSL currently seems to "re-recognize" 
each patch when it reads a patchlib. I also realize that I left "Field1" 
and "Field2" out of the xml example. That's because I think we need to 
decide on a different way to handle them. If we're going to support 
generic fields, then let's make them *truly* generic and let the user 
name them whatever they want, like:

   <userfield name="Field1">Here's some text for Field1</userfield>

Frankly, I don't really like above idea much... but I think it's better 
than our current system of hard-coded (and numbered) field names.

- Joe