W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-audio@w3.org > October to December 2012

[Bug 20039] The callbacks of the decodeAudioData API are underspecified

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2012 17:28:20 +0000
To: public-audio@w3.org
Message-ID: <bug-20039-5429-RuW3MWiEse@http.www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/>
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20039

--- Comment #3 from Chris Rogers <crogers@google.com> ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> (In reply to comment #1)
> > (In reply to comment #0)
> > > Here is a list of problems that come to my mind right now.
> > > 
> > > 1. It's not clear whether the callbacks have to be asynchronous or not.  For
> > > example, if for some reason the implementation decides that it's unable to
> > > decode the audio right away, should it just call the failure callback
> > > directly, or call it the next time that the execution hits the event loop.
> > 
> > I'm not sure I completely understand the question.  The decoding is meant to
> > be asynchronous, so in some sense will not happen "right away".  So neither
> > the success nor the error callback will be called directly, but at some
> > later time (a later time in the event loop).  The failure callback should be
> > called if there is an actual error in the decoding, meaning that the audio
> > data is not one of the known and supported formats (depending on what the
> > user agent supports), or that the audio data is corrupt.
> 
> Let me clarify the question.  Consider this test case for example:
> 
>   var cx = new AudioContext();
>   var buf = new Uint8Array(100);
>   // buf is filled with zeros, and therefore, not a valid audio stream
>   var decodeFailed = false;
>   cx.decodeAudioData(buf.buffer, function(x) {
>     }, function(x) {
>       decodeFailed = true;
>   });
>   alert(decodeFailed);
> 
> The question is, should decodeFailed be true or false after the call to
> decodeAudioData.  The reason that I started to think about this is that in
> the Gecko implementation, we sniff the buffer synchronously as it's a
> relatively cheap operation, so in this case we will know immediately that
> the decoding operation will fail.  Now, we have the option of calling the
> failure callback immediately which means that decodeFailed will be true when
> decodeAudioData returns, or calling it the next time that we hit the event
> loop, which means that decodeFailed will be false when decodeAudioData
> returns.

I see.  I would say that decodeFailed will be false, since the callback will
only happen the next time we hit the event loop.

> 
> > > 2. It's not clear what the AudioBuffer callback passed to the failure
> > > callback should contain.  For example, if the audio's type cannot be
> > > sniffed, what should be passed to the failure callback?  What if the source
> > > buffer doesn't contain valid samples and the decoding operation fails
> > > half-way?
> > 
> > I think it's best that there is *no* AudioBuffer in the failure case.
> 
> In that case, we need to change the Web IDL to offer two distinct callback
> types, like this:
> 
>   callback DecodeSuccessCallback = void (AudioBuffer decodedData);
>   callback DecodeErrorCallback = void ();
> 
>   interface AudioContext {
>     // ...
>     void decodeAudioData(ArrayBuffer audioData,
>                          DecodeSuccessCallback successCallback,
>                          optional DecodeErrorCallback errorCallback);
>     // ...
>   };
> 
> I personally think that this makes way more sense.  Please let me know if
> you want me to change the Web IDL accordingly.  Thanks!

Yes, agreed this makes more sense, and feel free to edit the IDL.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Thursday, 29 November 2012 17:28:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:50:03 UTC