W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-audio@w3.org > January to March 2012

Re: Minutes of Audio WG meeting, 2012-02-06

From: James Ingram <j.ingram@netcologne.de>
Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2012 23:57:44 +0100
Message-ID: <4F31AC68.9070609@netcologne.de>
To: public-audio@w3.org
Just wanted to say thanks for yesterday.

I've been using the "Microsoft GS Wavetable Synth" in my development 
work, and had forgotten all about JavaScript synthesizers (I'm not an 
audio person), so I was thinking very much in terms of MIDI devices, and 
pushed things in that direction. Very good to have established that that 
approach could be made to work, at least in principle.

But I now read that some people have reservations about exposing MIDI 
devices.
Doing without them would, of course, not be the end of this story. 
There's a lot that could be done with an SVG-MIDI file, a JS 
synthesizer, a mouse and a QUERTY keyboard.

It might be worth trying to find some middle ground with the devices. 
For example:
1. Maybe some devices are less in need of being kept secret than others. 
Would exposing the "Microsoft GS Wavetable Synth" or even a MIDI 
keyboard really be so bad?
2. Could/Should browsers be configurable so that they only see the 
user's sensitive devices when in off-line mode? If I'm seriously 
concentrating on working with a score, I don't need to be surfing.

Apropos other notations: Piano roll notation is very easy to implement 
in SVG, if that's what people really want. The graphics are completely 
independent of the MIDI info. SVG also has animation, though I've never 
used it. I'm pretty sure there are ways to synchronize with audio.

Just trying to think creatively...

Thanks again,
James

-- 
www.james-ingram-act-two.de
Received on Tuesday, 7 February 2012 23:01:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 7 February 2012 23:01:19 GMT