W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-audio@w3.org > April to June 2012

Re: Group rechartering update (Was: [Agenda] W3C Audio WG Teleconference, 23rd May 2012)

From: Philip Jägenstedt <philipj@opera.com>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 17:28:53 +0200
To: "Audio Working Group" <public-audio@w3.org>, "olivier Thereaux" <olivier.thereaux@bbc.co.uk>
Cc: "Chris Wilson" <cwilso@google.com>
Message-ID: <op.werpafhosr6mfa@kirk>
On Wed, 23 May 2012 10:40:40 +0200, olivier Thereaux  
<olivier.thereaux@bbc.co.uk> wrote:

> Hi Chris, group.
> On 22 May 2012, at 18:27, Chris Wilson wrote:
>> One item I'd like added to the agenda - or it can be done in email  
>> prior.   I just wanted an update of the effort to add MIDI to the  
>> charter.  I want to be sure to work the time to actually edit the spec  
>> in to my plan when it's appropriate.  :)
> I have actually been the bottleneck on this, my apologies.
> As far as I can tell, the new charter is almost ready, and we mostly  
> need to agree on milestones. It is of course nearly impossible to "plan"  
> a standard (when all factors - scope, effort, speed - can vary wildly)  
> but we are asked to give a rough estimate when we expect our  
> deliverables to reach certain maturity steps:
> http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html#maturity-levels
> As a strawman proposal, we could go with something along those lines:
> * Web Audio API *
> FPWD: Dec 2011
> LC: Q3 2012
> CR: Q1 2013
> PR: Q2 2013
> REC: Q2 2013
> * MIDI API *
> FPWD: Q2 2012
> LC: Q3 2012
> CR: Q1 2013
> PR: Q2 2013
> REC: Q2 2013
> This would mean that in a year from now, we'd have the two  
> specifications reach significant consensus in the group, we'd have  
> organised their review, created their test suites and tested  
> implementations. It does not sound completely unreasonable, although  
> I'll admit to worrying about the complexity of testing our specs.
> Feedback welcome on these rough estimates, both from editors and group  
> members. I'll make some space for a discussion on it at our call today.

The timeline for Web Audio API looks very optimistic. Some groups require  
two independent implementations passing a test suite before going to REC,  
and I believe this is a good model to follow. Given that we don't know of  
work on a second implementation or test suite being started, I'd be very  
surprised if we could reach that point only a year from now.

Philip Jägenstedt
Core Developer
Opera Software
Received on Wednesday, 23 May 2012 15:29:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:03:04 UTC