- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2012 19:21:36 +0000
- To: public-audio@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20411 Chris Wilson <cwilso@gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |cwilso@gmail.com --- Comment #6 from Chris Wilson <cwilso@gmail.com> --- (In reply to comment #5) > (In reply to comment #4) > > Certainly not against the rules. What I'm wondering is if there can be a > > difference between the MIDI's timestamp and the Event's timestamp. > > > > However, the timeStamp generally refers to the time at which the > > corresponding event took place of the thing one is interested in (and not > > when the Event object was constructed). If that definition of timeStamp > > holds, then I don't see any problem with overriding timeStamp to have a high > > precision. > > Yes, that definition holds. Good! Yes, that definitions holds, but is it really okay to redefine the timeStamp to a completely different type? The timestamps we have now are DOMHighResTimeStamps, which are a double representing time since navigation start; DOMTimeStamps are unsigned long longs representing (integer) milliseconds since 00:00:00 UTC on 1 January 1970. receivedTime? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Monday, 17 December 2012 19:21:38 UTC