- From: Marcus Geelnard <mage@opera.com>
- Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 09:06:13 +0200
- To: olli@pettay.fi, "Chris Wilson" <cwilso@google.com>
- Cc: robert@ocallahan.org, "Chris Rogers" <crogers@google.com>, Philip Jägenstedt <philipj@opera.com>, public-audio@w3.org
Den 2012-05-16 01:54:17 skrev Chris Wilson <cwilso@google.com>: > Unless the W3C Recommended API is named "webkitAudioContext", this > shouldn't be too much of a problem. > > Seriously, though - no, we do not want to arbitrarily break the games and > other apps that have gone out already using early versions of the Web > Audio > API, but we are committed to migrating those apps over to a standard API > that works across browsers, whatever that API might be. While I agree > our > evangelism has not been quite perfect in terms of clearly delineating > experimental and early APIs, I would point out that in our more recent > efforts (e.g. recent articles on HTML5Rocks), we've been purposefully > improving that, and even with that admission, I would not characterize > our > past efforts as heavy evangelism for production apps. And it currently > *IS* the only solution for audio processing in Chrome; we certainly hope > to > improve it and turn it into a cross-browser standard API, but we've never > presented it as such that I know of. > > At any rate - we can absolutely take breaking changes - for some > features, > even under our webkit prefix. I don't know, to use one example, how > quickly we could remove "noteOn" after adding "start", under the webkit > prefix- I wouldn't want to break Angry Birds, etc., although I'm happy to > go evangelize that they need to change their code for such changes > (presuming there's an actual reason and it's not gratuitous). After all, > that's my job. I don't really see this as an issue. We could have two audio API:s during a transitional period: * The WebKit prefixed version, which basically stays as it is today and continues to support legacy applications that are unlikely to migrate to the new API in a timely manner. * The un-prefixed cross-browser "standard" version. The fact is that whatever the audio API will look like, it will stay around for a very long time - and I think the Web deserves a good, sustainable audio API, so let's not push something just because of legacy support (there are already too many examples of that in the computer industry). /Marcus > As the standard stabilizes, I'd expect we would all implement unprefixed, > and it would reflect whatever is in the spec. If late-breaking changes > come up, we would have to break people. > > -Chris > > On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 4:37 PM, Olli Pettay > <Olli.Pettay@helsinki.fi>wrote: > >> On 05/16/2012 02:15 AM, Robert O'Callahan wrote: >> >> On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 10:33 AM, Olli Pettay >> <Olli.Pettay@helsinki.fi<mailto: >>> Olli.Pettay@helsinki.**fi <Olli.Pettay@helsinki.fi>>> wrote: >>> >>> On 05/16/2012 01:26 AM, Robert O'Callahan wrote: >>> >>> One thing that is going to be really important when addressing >>> this feedback is understanding the existing compatibility constraints. >>> As I >>> said in an >>> earlier email, if Webkit is unwilling to take a change, due to >>> compatibility concerns, then we probably don't want to take that >>> change in >>> the >>> spec either. >>> >>> >>> What compatibility concerns? We're talking about an early draft of a >>> spec, which is even implemented prefixed. >>> Changing the spec sure should be possible. >>> >>> >>> Google has heavily evangelized use of Web Audio in production apps. It >>> has been presented as *the* solution for audio processing, without >>> caveats. >>> >> >> That sounds like a bug in Google evangelism process. Or is it the case >> that they have evangelized for >> Chrome Web Apps (or whatever is the right term). Those are in a walled >> garden, so not really part of the web. >> >> >> -Olli >> >> >> >> Google people told me they're not willing to break compatibility with >> the >>> content created under those assumptions. >>> >>> Rob >>> -- >>> “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your >>> enemy.’ But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who >>> persecute >>> you, >>> that you may be children of your Father in heaven. ... If you love >>> those >>> who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors >>> doing >>> that? And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more >>> than >>> others?" [Matthew 5:43-47] >>> >>> >> >> >> -- Använder Operas banbrytande e-postklient: http://www.opera.com/mail/
Received on Saturday, 19 May 2012 05:41:12 UTC