W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-audio@w3.org > July to September 2014

Re: Call for Consensus: retire current ScriptProcessorNode design & AudioWorker proposal

From: Chris Wilson <cwilso@google.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2014 14:13:00 -0700
Message-ID: <CAJK2wqXCkxcLwqSkiSoJxSXD-=VmjY1w+mGkFqWc699AF4ne1A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Andrew Vermie <andrew.vermie@gmail.com>
Cc: "Robert O'Callahan" <robert@ocallahan.org>, Olivier Thereaux <olivier.thereaux@bbc.co.uk>, Audio WG <public-audio@w3.org>
I think there was some rough consensus on the call last week to make a
clean break.


On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 1:59 PM, Andrew Vermie <andrew.vermie@gmail.com>
wrote:

> What are the advantages of introducing the new spec under the old API
> names (createScriptProcessor + ScriptProcessorNode), rather than creating a
> new API for this proposal and deprecating the old API?
>
> As a developer working on a project with Web Audio API, I think it would
> be less disruptive to have a clean break with the old API.  Thoughts?
>
> On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 2:40 PM, Chris Wilson <cwilso@google.com> wrote:
>
>> That is precisely why I highlighted this risk.
>>
>> ScriptProcessors are certainly used today.  I don't think it's horrific
>> to consider switching it over (and then off), but I do think it will take a
>> concerted, cooperative effort to do so.  I think at the very least Mozilla
>> and Chrome (and ideally Safari, too) would need to support the new version
>> in roughly the same timeframe, would need to throw a "deprecation warning",
>> and would need to have a concerted plan to shut off the old version in
>> roughly the same timeframe, too.  Oh, and make sure IE doesn't support the
>> old one at all.  :)
>>
>> We are getting a fair bit of heat for turning off old bits in Chrome, so
>> believe me, I'm not taking this lightly.  I just think the previous
>> incarnation is very bad.
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 7:30 PM, Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> How can we remove the current ScriptProcessorNode from the spec? My
>>> understanding is that quite a few sites and applications depend on it.
>>>
>>> Rob
>>> --
>>> oIo otoeololo oyooouo otohoaoto oaonoyooonoeo owohooo oioso oaonogoroyo
>>> owoiotoho oao oboroootohoeoro oooro osoiosotoeoro owoiololo oboeo
>>> osouobojoeocoto otooo ojouodogomoeonoto.o oAogoaoiono,o oaonoyooonoeo
>>> owohooo
>>> osoaoyoso otooo oao oboroootohoeoro oooro osoiosotoeoro,o
>>> o‘oRoaocoao,o’o oioso
>>> oaonosowoeoroaoboloeo otooo otohoeo ocooouoroto.o oAonodo oaonoyooonoeo
>>> owohooo
>>> osoaoyoso,o o‘oYooouo ofooooolo!o’o owoiololo oboeo oiono odoaonogoeoro
>>> ooofo
>>> otohoeo ofoioroeo ooofo ohoeololo.
>>>
>>
>>
>
Received on Monday, 11 August 2014 21:13:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:50:14 UTC