W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-audio@w3.org > July to September 2012

Audio WG summary, 1-15 August 2012

From: olivier Thereaux <olivier.thereaux@bbc.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2012 15:42:44 +0100
Message-Id: <6B144906-10F0-46B9-A344-A8A24CD69778@bbc.co.uk>
To: Audio Working Group <public-audio@w3.org>
This is a summary of WG activity (mailing-list, bugzilla and spec change sets) for the first two weeks of August 2012.


One major topic of discussion during the first two weeks of August was prompted by the (re)discovery of the sync/delay issue with custom nodes. 
Thread: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-audio/2012JulSep/thread.html#msg422

One solution proposed during the discussion was to have everything in jsnodes, a proposal which ignited another revisit of the native vs custom nodes discussion.
E-mail: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-audio/2012JulSep/0450.html
Thread: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-audio/2012JulSep/thread.html#msg493

The general consensus (but not unanimous opinion) is that both native and custom nodes are desirable, with some thinking about whether the current architecture of JSAudioNodes is the right one. I find this e-mail by Kumar to be the best summary of the consensus and questions raised so far: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-audio/2012JulSep/0550.html


On the spec/doc front, Joe and I have been working on the Use Cases and Requirements doc, revising the scenarios and developing Implementation Notes (and requirements) for each scenario:



* Teleconference agenda, 22nd August:

* Last days to review the new Working Group charter. We expect the new charter to get a green light soon, and publish a FPWD of the MIDI API soon after.


Hope you found this summary useful/interesting.
Received on Monday, 20 August 2012 14:43:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:03:11 UTC