Re: Extending MediaRecorder to record from Web Audio node faster than real time?

On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 3:26 AM, Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
wrote:

> On 08/27/2014 03:35 AM, Robert O'Callahan wrote:
>
>> BTW as far as "details to be worked out", I don't think there's anything
>> new here to figure out (although there is a bit more text to write). "new
>> MediaRecorder(audioNode)" should behave almost exactly like "var dest =
>> audioNode.context.createMediaStreamDestination();
>> audioNode.connect(dest); new MediaRecorder(dest.stream);". The only edge
>> case I can think of is handling ChannelSplitterNode.
>>
>
> If it should behave "almost exactly like", can we define it to behave
> "exactly like"?
>

Yes, except that createMediaStreamDestination() doesn't work for
OfflineAudioContexts and "new MediaRecorder(audioNode)" does.

Including a possible error exception when encountering ChannelSplitterNode?
>

With the above "definition", ChannelSplitterNode is not a problem; the 0'th
output (the first channel) of audioNode gets recorded and the others are
ignored. We'd just need to say that in the spec.

If there are two ways of doing the same thing, I'd like to have completely
> consistent behaviour rather than "almost consistent behaviour".


Of course.

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.