- From: Jussi Kalliokoski <jussi.kalliokoski@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2012 22:18:40 +0300
- To: Audio Working Group <public-audio@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAJhzemUJ4tk_sLWW3GgKMwpdBRHLn4HgjSB-yvMAN156R4Y+iA@mail.gmail.com>
Thinking about what we just discussed on the call, I think setting the sample rate is an essential feature that should be there in the first version of the spec, but it might suffice to have just the sample rate of the AudioContext possible to be adjusted on initialization, for the first version. That I think would cover the most critical UCs, and we could add more complex features to v2. What do you think? Cheers, Jussi On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 7:40 PM, Audio Working Group Issue Tracker < sysbot+tracker@w3.org> wrote: > Audio-ISSUE-4 (quinnirill): Setting sample rates for individual > JavaScriptProcessingNodes [Web Audio API] > > http://www.w3.org/2011/audio/track/issues/4 > > Raised by: Jussi Kalliokoski > On product: Web Audio API > > Ideally, the end developer should be able to create custom processing > nodes with specific sample rates within a single AudioContext. This is very > useful, since high quality resampling in JavaScript is relatively > expensive, and a required feature for anything that deals with external > media sources, for example JS codecs. > > The sample rate should also be possible to be changed on the fly to allow > for features like changing the playback rate of a codec (required if you'd > want to use JS codecs to extend <audio> for example). > > Related thread: > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-audio/2012JanMar/0294.html > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-audio/2012JanMar/0296.html > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-audio/2012JanMar/0297.html > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-audio/2012JanMar/0304.html > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-audio/2012JanMar/0305.html > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-audio/2012JanMar/0328.html > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-audio/2012JanMar/0329.html > > > > >
Received on Monday, 26 March 2012 19:19:08 UTC