Minor syntax inconsistency

[karleaton]

Just got our new Orb XF and have been 'playing' with it. Great stuff!

 

I have spotted a minor inconsistency in the syntax. I'm used to the old Strand desks where you can record cues with the 'CUE n RECORD' syntax (I believe you can also use 'RECORD CUE n' but I never have). Other records e.g. subs work the same.

 

The Orb only seems to support the 'RECORD CUE n' syntax, which is fine I can live with that. However when deleting cues it will accept either the 'DELETE CUE n' or the 'CUE n DELETE' syntax, which seems odd.

 

Just thought I'd mention it.

[Kirkup_xp]

Hi Karl

 

This is due to the fact that you can record a cue onto a UDK - the syntax to record a cue onto a UDK is CUE n RECORD <UDK> - therefore, we can't assume CUE n RECORD will store your cue.

 

I hope this helps,

 

 

 

Peter

[karleaton]

Ok, so CUE n RECORD is reserved for use in recording a cue to the UDKs.

 

But it still bothers me a bit. If you have to use RECORD CUE n to record cues then why not enforce the use of DELETE CUE n when deleting? Using a verb noun imperative actually does make more sense if you are aiming at english speaking users (i.e. RECORD CUE 1 is good English whereas CUE 1 RECORD isn't). Having said that using CUE n RECORD <UDK> promptly breaks the convention - something like RECORD <UDK> CUE n would seem to fit better.

 

Sorry, I know I'm being pedantic but twenty odd years in IT has taught me that interfaces are far easier to learn and use if they are consistent (which is why Linux hasn't overthrown Windows).

[pierotec]

Hi,

strange, I have a frog2 which should have the same software, the correct syntax is "RECORD CUE n" or "DELETE CUE n"

 

Piero

[karleaton]

strange, I have a frog2 which should have the same software, the correct syntax is "RECORD CUE n" or "DELETE CUE n"

Yes, they are the correct syntax. However, on the Orb it seems that you can also delete cues using "CUE n DELETE" but you can't record them using "CUE n RECORD".

 

It just confused me a bit because on the Strand desks you could use "CUE n RECORD" and when I forgot and did that on the Orb it just ignored me. However if I get it wrong when deleting a cue and try "CUE n DELETE" it works.

 

I only originally posted because I wondered if it should/could also accept "CUE n RECORD" (for those of us converting to the Orb from other systems) but as Peter pointed out that syntax is already used elsewhere on the Orb.

 

The simple answer, of course, is for me to use the correct syntax.

[Jon Hole]

Hi Karleaton,

 

The Record syntax is consistent, in such as you always follow these steps:

 

- Start with what you want to record. This might be bring up channels, laying out the screens, or entering a pre recorded item (such as a palette).

 

- Second, press record

 

- Third, state where you want it. This might be by typing CUE 1, or by pressing <UDK>

 

So, the syntax CUE n RECORD <UDK> is following this by stating that you want the contents of CUE n, RECORDed in <UDK>

 

I hope this clears things up,

[karleaton]

Ah ha! When you put it like that it does make sense. I wasn't looking at the setting of levels when recording cues as being part of the RECORD syntax. Thanks for clearing that up.

 

There is one unfortunate thing about having the "CUE n RECORD <UDK>" syntax and that is that when I slip into Strand mode and try recording a cue using "CUE n RECORD" it doesn't indicate I've messed up, it just sits there waiting for me to specify which key I want to record it to. If you're like me and you don't bother looking at the screens very often you can plod away 'recording' cues only to find none of them have actually worked.

 

I know there's nothing you can do about that and it's probably a rare combination - a numpty who routinely uses the wrong syntax and doesn't bother looking at the screens after every command. I'm just so used to using that syntax and if the desk doesn't bleep in complaint I assume it's worked.

 

Any way I shall get into the habit of using "RECORD CUE n". Fortunately Strand desks will accept that syntax as well so I'll still be all right when I visit other local venues that still use the 300 and 500 series desks.

[Jon Hole]

I'm glad that's helped.

 

Using a verb noun imperative actually does make more sense if you are aiming at english speaking users (i.e. RECORD CUE 1 is good English whereas CUE 1 RECORD isn't)

 

I think you have summed up what we are trying to achieve. It's for this reason that the Cope / Move buttons don't just say that, but say 'Copy To' and 'Move To' - there's no confusion in which way around to type the syntax.

 

However, thanks for the feedback, and please keep it coming. We take all suggestions seriously, and they get logged into a database which we then discuss and prioritise.

[Kirkup_xp]

Hi guys

 

I should add to this thread, that the reason we've chosen to include the option to delete cues using the inverse sytnax is to help those users who are familar with other syntax methods. Where possible the ORB (and ZerOS generally) will accept most common syntaxes for recording a cue... there are infact quite a few methods to store,name,delete,move etc a cue.

 

eg, for RECORD, all of these syntaxes achieve much the same outcome:

 

RECORD CUE 1 ENTER

RECORD STACK 1 CUE 2 ENTER

RECORD 1/3 ENTER

RECORD ENTER

RECORD NAME {my name} ENTER

RECORD CUE 6 NAME {my name} ENTER

RECORD 7 ENTER

RECORD 8 NAME {my name} ENTER

... (ENTER can also be replaced with TIME followed by TIME syntaxes)

 

There are benefits of following 'standard' syntax, such as RECORD CUE 1 ENTER, DELETE CUE 1 ENTER, etc, but we are very aware that many users come from different consoles which operate with different sytnaxes. As such, we aim to expand our syntax to encorporate as many other options as possible. As explained above, this isn't always possible without 'breaking' some of our syntaxes, so sometimes we have to make compromises, but where we can, we try to help you out.

 

I hope this helps to clear up our positioning on syntax - please let us know if you spot anything odd, as Jon says, we do listen to all your feedback.

 

 

 

Peter

[karleaton]

Thanks Jon and Peter, I know it seems odd but I'm happier for knowing how the syntax works - too long spent in IT probably.

 

Not sure how sensible this suggestion is but I'll put it forward anyway:

 

CUE n RECORD <UDK> -> records the cue on the appropriate UDK,

CUE n RECORD ENTER -> records the cue in the same way as the RECORD CUE n ENTER method.

 

Not sure if that breaks anything else or if it's wise to bend the syntax in this way.