Re: WebMidi

On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 12:27 PM, Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Thursday, December 20, 2012 at 5:21 PM, Brian Kardell wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 11:52 AM, Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com(mailto:
> w3c@marcosc.com)> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thursday, December 20, 2012 at 4:46 PM, Brian Kardell wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 11:38 AM, Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com(mailto:
> w3c@marcosc.com) (mailto:w3c@marcosc.com)> wrote:
> > > > > > Would this be as simple as changing that to xRequestMIDIAccess,
> or would (likely IMO) you really want the objects returned to be prefixed
> as well so that it is fairly obvious in the code what you are doing?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Kinda… for this API that might be ok. Some parts cannot be
> prefixed because they extend host objects (e.g., MIDIEvent).
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > This is exactly the part of the discussion that i think is worth
> having. If you xRequest - do you get MIDIEvent or xMIDIEvent... If you get
> the later, then what you describe is not so much a problem, right?
> > >
> > > Neither, you get CustomEvent() … there is no way around this. It's a
> problem: you can't extend host objects.
> >
> > Haha - crap... I even retyped "event" and didn't notice. Well - that is
> certainly a great example of something it would be good to come up with a
> common/accepted guidance around :) I meant to say for stuff like MIDIInput
> / MIDIOutput..
>
> I was going to implement it over the weekend. I know it's not really in
> our scope to actually make prollyfills, but I'm doing 2 at the moment and I
> think it's a great learning opportunity. What will be more challenging will
> be getting this stuff in front of other devs to comment on.
>
> >
> > > > > > 2) Whether there are future common bits (like
> window.performance.now) which we'd also like to consider how to make
> available easily for things like this - and what form(s) might those take
> to make it both easy and light for authors of prollyfills.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Ok, so again we come back to Clint's discussion… Performance is a
> "W3C Recommendation" as of "17 December 2012", so that's now "polyfill". No
> need to prefix.
> > > >
> > > > No - that's exactly what I mean actually - a friendly way to mix
> them together nicely so it's easy to build and track that stuff...
> > > Not sure TBH.
> >
> >
> > Me neither - it is mostly a question to get the gears rolling.
>
> Lets make something an find out :)
>
>
>


I just have to say "making them is not in our scope" should be taken with a
heavy dose of reality :)  I would us to be members of that community and as
we are still laying out good examples and things I think it is inevitable
that we will write some as well as take some things that are close, fork
them and submit them.

-- 
Brian Kardell :: @briankardell :: hitchjs.com