- From: Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com>
- Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2012 18:23:37 +0000
- To: Chris Wilson <cwilso@google.com>
- Cc: Marcos Caceres <marcosscaceres@gmail.com>, Jussi Kalliokoski <jussi.kalliokoski@gmail.com>, "public-audio@w3.org" <public-audio@w3.org>
Marcos Caceres On Tuesday, December 18, 2012 at 6:19 PM, Chris Wilson wrote: > On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 12:24 AM, Marcos Caceres <marcosscaceres@gmail.com (mailto:marcosscaceres@gmail.com)> wrote: > > This reminds me: why "short" instead of "byte" as the type? I raised that in another email as it applies generally. > Bah. yeah, I mean octet. All the little types are confusing early in the morning. > > No reason. :) Actually, no reason it's not "octet" - it should not be "byte", because I think the conversion might cause confusion (or problems? I don't know what happens when "0x7f" is assigned to a signed 8-bit value.) Yeah, octet :) > > > > Agree. Could get pretty ugly. I think we should make sure examples in the spec always use the pattern Jussi mentioned: > > > > var data = [...] > > output.send(data); > > > > Just to underscore that the array brackets are there in the spec examples, you mean? OK. Yeah, send(data,timestamps) just looks nice.
Received on Tuesday, 18 December 2012 18:24:11 UTC