Re: navigator.requestMIDIAccess() not defined in Chrome extensions

Hi Lonce!

Many thanks for that! After the usual beginners problems, I just got 
Node.js working, and it is indeed a lot simpler than xampp Apache! :-)

The main problem I had getting this working was that, according to the 
Readme, I should have entered the lines "npm install express" and "npm 
install socket.io" at a command line somewhere, but at no stage could I 
find a command line that would accept them. There were no similar 
options in the installer either...

For the record, here's what I actually did:
1. Installed Node.js from their website: http://nodejs.org/. That gave 
me a (64bit) installation in a nodejs directory.
2. Copied your nodeserver.js and www directory into the nodejs directory 
(parallel to the node.exe application and node_modules directory created 
by the installation).
3. Copied my application into the nodejs/www directory.
4. Ran the nodejs/node.exe command line application, and entered the 
command line "node nodeServer.js 81" (Port 80 is already in use on my 
system.)
5. Opened and ran my application from localhost:81 (using Chrome with 
the --disable-web-security flag set).

Maybe you were expecting me to use a different installer?

Thanks again!
Best wishes,
James


On 23.11.2013 13:39, Lonce Wyse wrote:
>
> Indeed, a little server on your local machine seems like the way to go.
> No need to punish yourself with apache or worse, the windows web 
> server. Node.js to the rescue!
>
> Attached is a skeletal node web server you can try. (You can run it 
> locally or remotely).
>
> Best,
>              - lonce
>
>
> On 11/20/2013 7:26 PM, James Ingram wrote:
>> Hi Charlie, Chris,
>>
>> Thanks for the quick replies!
>> I tried installing  a local web server (wampserver) this afternoon, 
>> but localhost is already occupied by IIS7 (I also have Visual Studio 
>> installed) and I got an error. I don't know how to upload files to 
>> IIS7 manually, and have not been able to find out if that's possible 
>> at all. I don't really want to mess with IIS7 in case I corrupt 
>> Visual Studio.
>>
>> Is it, in principle, possible to install a second localhost server on 
>> Windows 7? (I don't know much about configuring servers, and the web 
>> seems full of outdated information...) If so, I'll have another go.
>>
>> All the best,
>> James
>>
>> p.s. I'd still like to see navigator.requestMIDIAccess() defined 
>> inside chrome extensions. :-)
>>
>>
>>
>> On 20.11.2013 18:14, Charlie Roberts wrote:
>>> Or (much easier) run a web server on your computer and then load the 
>>> files via http from there... perhaps I'm not understanding the 
>>> question correctly though.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 9:11 AM, Charlie Roberts 
>>> <bigbadotis@gmail.com <mailto:bigbadotis@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>>     This doesn't exactly answer your question, but as a workaround
>>>     perhaps you could use the cache manifest?
>>>
>>>     http://www.html5rocks.com/en/tutorials/appcache/beginner/
>>>
>>>     It has worked well for me when performing, although I haven't
>>>     been using MIDI.
>>>
>>>     - Charlie
>>>
>>>
>>>     On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 5:26 AM, James Ingram
>>>     <j.ingram@netcologne.de <mailto:j.ingram@netcologne.de>> wrote:
>>>
>>>         Hi,
>>>
>>>         I'm trying to make a version of my application [1] which
>>>         will work offline.
>>>
>>>         This is important, because I want to use it during live
>>>         performances, and can't rely on the internet being available
>>>         at all venues.
>>>
>>>         So I need to work with local files.
>>>
>>>         As far as I can see, the only way to load local files into a
>>>         web page in Chrome is to deliver them inside a Chrome extension.
>>>
>>>         But Chrome extensions can't share variables (e.g.
>>>         midiAccess) with the JS on the main page, so I need to call
>>>         navigator.requestMIDIAccess() inside the extension.
>>>
>>>         But navigator.requestMIDIAccess() isn't defined there, so
>>>         I'm stuck.
>>>
>>>         I see no reason why navigator.requestMIDIAccess() shouldn't
>>>         be defined inside an extension. There's no more security
>>>         risk accessing midi devices there than anywhere else. Maybe
>>>         it's just an oversight?
>>>
>>>         Any ideas?
>>>
>>>         All the best,
>>>         James
>>>
>>>         [1]
>>>         http://james-ingram-act-two.de/open-source/assistantPerformer/assistantPerformer.html
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> -- 
>>
>> http://james-ingram-act-two.de/
>


-- 

http://james-ingram-act-two.de/

Received on Monday, 25 November 2013 14:58:35 UTC