Heh. I was thinking that the word "device" was misleading in the API. :) On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 6:32 AM, Jussi Kalliokoski < jussi.kalliokoski@gmail.com> wrote: > I'm not sure MIDI *Communication* API will be broad enough, as it is > possible that the spec will be extended in the future (maybe V2 or so, but > not in the near future, definitely not before CR) to support creating > virtual MIDI devices as well. However, I have no other objections to the > name. :) > > Cheers, > Jussi > > > On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 2:18 PM, olivier Thereaux < > olivier.thereaux@bbc.co.uk> wrote: > >> Doug, >> >> >> On 1 Jun 2012, at 01:26, Doug Schepers wrote: >> >> http://www.w3.org/2011/audio/charter/2012/charter-proposed.html >> > >> > I've now updated this. >> >> This latest revision looks good. May I suggest adding a very short >> sentence about MIDI to the intro/mission paragraph, too? >> >> Suggested rewrite: >> « The mission of the Audio Working Group, part of the Rich Web Client >> Activity, is to add advanced sound and music capabilities to the Open Web >> Platform. >> >> Building upon and expanding the basic functionalities brought by the >> <audio> and <video> media elements in HTML5, the Audio Working Group will >> define client-side script APIs which will support the features required by >> rich interactive applications including the ability to process and >> synthesize audio streams directly in script, as well as giving access to >> musical instruments through a bridge with existing system-level MIDI APIs. » >> >> >> >> I note that it names the MIDI spec "MIDI Device Communication API", which >> I like. >> Would like to hear thoughts from the group (and especially Chris and >> Jussi) on this naming. >> >> Olivier >> >> >
Received on Friday, 1 June 2012 16:51:36 UTC