Re: "maplike" changes

The subclassing issue didn't come up at TPAC - in fact, it came up because
Ian revisited his thinking about property definitions from TPAC.

It was first mentioned here, I believe:

https://github.com/WebAudio/web-audio-api/issues/990#issuecomment-250260410



.            .       .    .  . ...Joe

Joe Berkovitz
President
Noteflight LLC

+1 978 314 6271

49R Day Street
Somerville MA 02144
USA

"Bring music to life"
www.noteflight.com

On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 12:46 PM, Hongchan Choi <hongchan@google.com> wrote:

> Hello Joe,
>
> This is an ah-ha moment for me:
>
> > There was a secondary issue driving the maplikes, which was the
> inability to override parameter or property getter methods in custom AWN
> subclasses (since these are attached to AWN instances, not to any
> particular class).
>
> Perhaps this is discussed at TPAC, because I honestly could not understand
> how this map-like business has begun. With that said, can you provide an
> example of the use case for me? I am not completely sure what this is
> trying to achieve.
>
> Also sendData() - ondata looks good to me as well. There is an implicit
> association between the AWN/AWP pair, and we don't need to create an event
> listener for this. I am wondering if we have other precedences of this
> pattern else where in the web platform.
>
> Best,
> Hongchan
>
> On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 12:18 PM Joe Berkovitz <joe@noteflight.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Hongchan,
>>
>> I agree that we do not absolutely require the maplike pattern for
>> properties -- what we require is something like postMessage-without-Transferables
>> (and we'd need it anyway, maplikes or not).
>>
>> There was a secondary issue driving the maplikes, which was the inability
>> to override parameter or property getter methods in custom AWN subclasses
>> (since these are attached to AWN instances, not to any particular class).
>> However, I believe this issue is only relevant to properties -- it does not
>> make sense to me that someone would want to do this for AudioParams.
>>
>> Back to your question: I think the best method/event signature for the
>> "lightweight data transfer" would be:
>>
>>     void sendData (any data);
>>     attribute EventHandler     ondata;
>>
>> I prefer `sendData` to `sendEvent` because we are not sending an event:
>> we are sending data, which *triggers* an event dispatched on the receiving
>> object. At least, that's my view so far!
>>
>> Best,
>>
>>
>> .            .       .    .  . ...Joe
>>
>> Joe Berkovitz
>> President
>> Noteflight LLC
>>
>> +1 978 314 6271 <(978)%20314-6271>
>>
>> 49R Day Street
>> Somerville MA 02144
>> USA
>>
>> "Bring music to life"
>> www.noteflight.com
>>
>> On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 12:15 PM, Hongchan Choi <hongchan@google.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hello Joe,
>>
>> Please take a loot at this issue: https://github.com/
>> WebAudio/web-audio-api/issues/988
>>
>> I don't think we have reached to a consensus yet. Paul expressed the
>> concern about the performance of the map-like pattern, and I agree with
>> him. With the assumption we ditch the map-like pattern, another issue is
>> the method signature of it: `sendEvent()` is good? or should we just follow
>> `postMessage()` without the transferrable?
>>
>> Sorry I have not been pushing this hard, but I will get back to the
>> discussion next week.
>>
>> Best,
>> Hongchan
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 10:36 AM Joe Berkovitz <joe@noteflight.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Is anyone working on adding the parameters/properties maplikes to the
>> spec for AWN/AWP, or can I take that on? It feels like an important piece
>> of the AW framework to fill in.
>>
>> I probably would not get the IDL or ECMAScript pieces completely right
>> but I am sure there is plenty of expert help on tap!
>>
>> .            .       .    .  . ...Joe
>>
>> Joe Berkovitz
>> President
>> Noteflight LLC
>>
>> +1 978 314 6271
>>
>> 49R Day Street
>> Somerville MA 02144
>> USA
>>
>> "Bring music to life"
>> www.noteflight.com
>>
>>
>>