Correct. We've had an Action Item about it: http://www.w3.org/2011/audio/track/actions/26 But hadn't added the relevant issue. The bugzilla equivalent is now : https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17415 Thanks. Olivier On 4 Jun 2012, at 08:39, Audio Working Group Issue Tracker wrote: > Audio-ISSUE-107 (JSWorkers): JavaScriptAudioNode processing in workers [Web Audio API] > > http://www.w3.org/2011/audio/track/issues/107 > > Raised by: Marcus Geelnard > On product: Web Audio API > > https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/audio/raw-file/tip/webaudio/specification.html#JavaScriptAudioNode > > It has been discussed before (see [1] and [2], for instance), but I could not find an issue for it, so here goes: > > The JavaScriptAudioNode should do its processing in a separate context (e.g. a worker) rather than in the main thread/context. It could potentially mean very low overhead for JavaScript-based audio processing, and seems to be a fundamental requirement for making the JavaScriptAudioNode really useful. > > [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-audio/2012JanMar/0225.html > [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-audio/2012JanMar/0245.html > > > > > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 6 June 2012 10:07:03 GMT