- From: Chris Rogers <crogers@google.com>
- Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2013 10:53:43 -0700
- To: rl baxter <baxrob@gmail.com>
- Cc: "public-audio@w3.org WG" <public-audio@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CA+EzO0kF-2YohNuAmf5BcAfJc56CdyVozNgk6qVg-OUENkb3VQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 2:05 AM, rl baxter <baxrob@gmail.com> wrote: > Sorry if this is a silly question, but is > AudioProcessingEvent.playbackTime implemented yet? I'm not seeing it, in > chrome.canary (just updated to latest version). Is this a 'doh' on my > part, or is .playbackTime still only in the spec? > Right now it's only in the spec, but there's a work in progress patch in WebKit... > > > On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 8:00 PM, Chris Rogers <crogers@google.com> wrote: > >> >> >> >> On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 1:29 PM, Russell McClellan <russell@motu.com>wrote: >> >>> On Apr 25, 2013, at 1:18 PM, bugzilla@jessica.w3.org wrote: >>> > - Corollary: need to document (if this is true) that currentTime >>> advances >>> > monotonically by a time quantum equal to the block size, as each block >>> is >>> > synthesized. This is important because if true it implies that >>> > ScriptProcessingNode JS code may consult currentTime instead of >>> > event.playbackTime, and that the latter is no longer needed since it's >>> always >>> > equal to currentTime. >>> >>> As a developer, I don't understand this idea at all. >>> ScriptProcessorNodes may (and do in all current implementations) have >>> additional latency above and beyond the rest of the audio graph. That is, >>> the global "block currently being processed" (whatever that means) will in >>> general not have any defined relationship to the playback time of the >>> current script processor block. Doing as you suggest here would make it >>> impossible for developers to synchronize javascript processing to other >>> audio graph processing. >>> >> >> Russell is quite right here, so that's why we have the .playbackTime >> attribute. >> >> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> -Russell >>> >>> >> >
Received on Saturday, 27 April 2013 17:54:10 UTC