W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-audio@w3.org > April to June 2012

Re: Web Audio API spec review

From: Colin Clark <colinbdclark@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 11:22:32 -0400
Cc: Olli Pettay <Olli.Pettay@helsinki.fi>, Philip Jägenstedt <philipj@opera.com>, public-audio@w3.org
Message-Id: <12DFA6CD-4358-4061-8B6C-C00113F54879@gmail.com>
To: Olivier Thereaux <olivier.thereaux@bbc.co.uk>
Hi Olivier,

Can you elaborate more on how how "industry traction" was measured by the working group? My sense so far is that the developers of audio libraries and applications on the Web that I'm aware of are currently supporting anything that works--Web Audio, Audio Data, whatever--regardless of its merits as an API, and are prepared to roll with significant changes in order to get a standard that is most amenable to long-term standardization. These are still very early days for audio on the web.

Colin

On 2012-05-15, at 9:14 AM, Olivier Thereaux wrote:

> Hi Olli,
> 
> On 15/05/2012 14:51, Olli Pettay wrote:
>> That is sad given the technical merits the MediaStream Processing API has.
>> I don't know why the WG ended up to such resolution.
> 
> For the record, there was never any doubt that the MediaStream Processing API had technical merits and a number of excellent ideas, which is why we will keep using it as a basis for our work after publishing it as a Note.
> 
> You may get an idea of the discussions leading to the resolution here:
> http://www.w3.org/2012/05/02-audio-minutes.html#item07
> then here:
> http://www.w3.org/2012/05/09-audio-minutes.html#item01
> 
> In a nutshell: the group decided to focus on building upon the spec proposal which was getting the clearest traction from the industry, while acknowledging and benefiting from the value of the other.

---
Colin Clark
Technical Lead, Fluid Project
http://fluidproject.org
Received on Tuesday, 15 May 2012 15:23:17 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 15 May 2012 15:23:17 GMT