On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 10:52 PM, Chris Pike <Chris.Pike@bbc.co.uk> wrote: > Since I'm not familiar with the process for web spec development it would > be interesting to know how important people believe it to be to validate > the choice of normative HRTF set in terms of sound quality. I can provide > some more background to the existing research if there is interest. > > If we do go with a normative reference HRTF then I think it's really > important to extend the spec (but probably in a later version) to allow > developers to provide their own alternative HRTF set. > We should not commit to only ever having one normative HRTF. I think we all agree that sooner or later we'll allow developers to provide their own, and we can also add more built-in HRTF sets to the spec (with an API to select between them) later if we get consensus on clearly better alternatives. If Chris Rogers is open to replacing Webkit/Blink's HRTF set with something else, we should have a discussion about what that something else should be, ASAP. If he isn't, then we should spec Webkit/Blink's HRTF set for now and we can start planning APIs to let developers add their own, and/or discuss adding additional HRTF sets to the spec, at our leisure. Rob -- q“qIqfq qyqoquq qlqoqvqeq qtqhqoqsqeq qwqhqoq qlqoqvqeq qyqoquq,q qwqhqaqtq qcqrqeqdqiqtq qiqsq qtqhqaqtq qtqoq qyqoquq?q qEqvqeqnq qsqiqnqnqeqrqsq qlqoqvqeq qtqhqoqsqeq qwqhqoq qlqoqvqeq qtqhqeqmq.q qAqnqdq qiqfq qyqoquq qdqoq qgqoqoqdq qtqoq qtqhqoqsqeq qwqhqoq qaqrqeq qgqoqoqdq qtqoq qyqoquq,q qwqhqaqtq qcqrqeqdqiqtq qiqsq qtqhqaqtq qtqoq qyqoquq?q qEqvqeqnq qsqiqnqnqeqrqsq qdqoq qtqhqaqtq.q"
Received on Thursday, 18 April 2013 11:09:41 UTC