W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-audio@w3.org > July to September 2013

Re: TAG feedback on Web Audio

From: Chris Wilson <cwilso@google.com>
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 2013 18:46:12 -0700
Message-ID: <CAJK2wqWQUopBbZA1uCd2r4zfWs_ZL_DsZHBWeKRVwfW0eA7o4Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Alex Russell <slightlyoff@google.com>
Cc: Noah Mendelsohn <nrm@arcanedomain.com>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>, Olivier Thereaux <Olivier.Thereaux@bbc.co.uk>, "robert@ocallahan.org" <robert@ocallahan.org>, "public-audio@w3.org" <public-audio@w3.org>, "www-tag@w3.org List" <www-tag@w3.org>
(Sorry, on vacation, and beach > Web Audio discussions. :)

Alex, as we discussed a few weeks ago - glitch-free, reasonably-low-latency
audio is something that I just don't believe JS - *as it is today - *can do.


On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 5:42 PM, Alex Russell <slightlyoff@google.com> wrote:

> Let me be clearer, then: the issue is that it introduces effects to JS
> that can't be described *in terms of JS*. It violates the
> run-to-completion model of the language without appealing to the turn-based
> concurrency model we use everywhere else in the platform.
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 10:43 AM, Chris Wilson <cwilso@google.com> wrote:
>
>> In addition, I'd ask that you be more explicit than calling this problem
>> "data races", because there's clearly some explicit effect you're trying to
>> prevent.  Any asynchronously-programmable or event-driven system can enable
>> developers to introduce race conditions.
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 10:09 PM, Noah Mendelsohn <nrm@arcanedomain.com>wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 7/29/2013 7:05 PM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 9:22 AM, Noah Mendelsohn<nrm@arcanedomain.**com<nrm@arcanedomain.com>>
>>>>  wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> >Again, I have no informed opinions on the specific merits, just
>>>>> suggesting a
>>>>> >useful role the TAG might play to clarify for the many members of the
>>>>> >community who are less expert on this than you are. Thank you.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>  I'm not sure we call out data races anywhere, it's something we just
>>>> don't do.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Well, my recollection may be faulty, but I think that one of the reasons
>>> the TAG took the trouble to formalize things like the architecture document
>>> was the belief that it's easier to ask skeptics to stick to rules that have
>>> been written down, and especially those that have garnered formal consensus
>>> through something like the Recommendation track.
>>>
>>> Whether it's worth taking a guideline on data races all the way to Rec
>>> I'm not sure, but it seems that it would be worth setting it down formally,
>>> perhaps in a TAG Finding/blog post/Recommendation or whatever will get the
>>> right level of discussion, consensus building, and eventually attention.
>>>
>>> Certainly, of the many things that have come up recently relating to
>>> APIs, this one seems deeply architectural and very much within the TAG's
>>> remit.
>>>
>>> Noah
>>>
>>>
>>
>
Received on Monday, 5 August 2013 01:46:40 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:50:10 UTC