W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-audio@w3.org > April to June 2016

Re: AudioWorklet examples

From: Raymond Toy <rtoy@google.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2016 10:42:43 -0700
Message-ID: <CAE3TgXEdA529oY-hQtt2agD63fqzwAOwDL2L5syX-H1mg5cF2w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Audio Working Group <public-audio@w3.org>
On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 7:46 AM, Joe Berkovitz <joe@noteflight.com> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I did miss the F2F so forgive me if I am missing something obvious --
> that's quite likely!
>
> We don't seem to have a comprehensive PR anywhere that amends the spec
> examples to reflect tha latest Worklet thinking; instead we have a
> discussion split between 3 open issues (777-779). The examples in those
> issues do not completely line up either (for instance, 'fooNode' is a node
> type in 777, but 'Foo' is used in 778). Furthermore the new examples seem
> to have abandoned the Node vs. NodeProcessor nomenclature that we used to
> have, so there is some confusion in my mind as to whether AudioWorkletNode
> is the main-thread interface, or the audio-thread interface.
>
> I feel like it would be useful to unify all this stuff and try to have a
> draft that pulls together all this material in a single place. Is there a
> PR or branch in the pipeline that will do this? If not, I'd like to try to
> pull one together. However I am nervous about getting out in front of the
> implementation efforts that seem to be going on.
>
> What do the spec editors and group members think?
>

I have no objection to a PR or branch to put everything in place. I assume
it wasn't done originally because this was the first time this new worklet
approach was used so nothing was really ready for a PR until we got some
agreement. I think we are mostly there, except for worklet item 3.
Received on Wednesday, 27 April 2016 17:43:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 27 April 2016 17:43:13 UTC