Re: Preparing the vote on the data race issue

Thanks a lot, Olivier, for setting this up.  I hope that we can reach a
decision through this vote.

I would also like to remind everyone that the proposals being put up to
vote here are only about AudioBufferSourceNode.  I hope that we can
continue the discussion about WaveShaperNode and AudioParam curves in the
mean time, and that we can reach to a consensus on those without the need
for another vote.

Cheers,

--
Ehsan
<http://ehsanakhgari.org/>


On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 9:50 AM, Olivier Thereaux <
Olivier.Thereaux@bbc.co.uk> wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> It is now most unlikely that the group will reach consensus on the
> question of "data races".
> Per the W3C process [1], we are therefore preparing a vote on the issue.
> [1] http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/policies#Votes
>
>
> The vote will be held as follows:
>
> * Each organisation and invited expert listed as member of the WG will be
> able to vote
>  The full list is available at:
> http://www.w3.org/2000/09/dbwg/details?group=46884&public=1&gs=1&order=org
>
>
> * Each organisation gets a single vote. Invited experts also get one vote
> each. W3C staff may cast a single vote for their organisation.
>
>
> * There will be a single question put to the vote. Voters will chose one
> of three options :
>
>  1. No change in the API. The spec will include a clarifying statement
> about the fact that effects of modifying a buffer while reading its data is
> not specified and might yield unexpected results.
>
>  2. ROC's proposal, as archived at:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-audio/2013AprJun/0644.html
>
>  3. Jer's alternative proposal, as archived at:
> https://gist.github.com/jernoble/6034137
>
> We encourage participants in the discussion to help with the formulation
> and summary of each option put to the vote. Please use the bugzilla issue
> to discuss summary/wording for each solution being put to the vote:
> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=22725
>
>
> * The vote will be held via the W3C's web-based polling system, and will
> run for one week. We plan to begin and announce the vote on Wednesday, 31st
> of July - which will give us a few days to tweak the wording of each
> proposal.
>
>
> * Proceedings of the vote, as well as its results, will be public.
>
>
> * The proposal with the most votes will be recorded as being the group's
> decision.
>
>
> * If two proposals are tied with the largest amount of votes, a second
> vote will be held with only those two options.
>
>
> * If all the proposals are tied, further discussion and submission of
> alternatives will be open for a week, after which point another vote will
> be organised.
>
>
> * If one participating organisation wishes to formally object to the
> result of the vote, they may do so, and their objection will be recorded.
> See W3C process section 3.5
> http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/policies#WGAppeals
>
>
> * The group's chair(s) may agree to revisit the decision in the future if
> presented with new information. See W3C process section 3.3.4
> http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/policies#WGChairReopen
>
>
> Any comment on this process is welcome. As mentioned above, we also
> encourage participants in the discussion to help with the formulation and
> summary of each option put to the vote.
>
> Many Thanks,
>
> Chris Lowis and Olivier Thereaux, W3C Audio WG co-chairs
>
>
> -----------------------------
> http://www.bbc.co.uk
> This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and
> may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless
> specifically stated.
> If you have received it in
> error, please delete it from your system.
> Do not use, copy or disclose the
> information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the sender
> immediately.
> Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails
> sent or received.
> Further communication will signify your consent to
> this.
> -----------------------------
>
>