- From: Olivier Thereaux <Olivier.Thereaux@bbc.co.uk>
- Date: Tue, 7 May 2013 10:35:22 +0000
- To: Ehsan Akhgari <ehsan.akhgari@gmail.com>
- CC: Ray Bellis <ray@bellis.me.uk>, "public-audio@w3.org" <public-audio@w3.org>
On 6 May 2013, at 17:08, Ehsan Akhgari <ehsan.akhgari@gmail.com> wrote: > What I think we should do is to remove the mention of nominal values here and everywhere else, and add test cases that make sure implementations do not clamp the gain value when its absolute value is greater than 1. I have to admit to being confused by the use of "nominal values" in the spec at the moment. The term "nominal" is not defined anywhere, and it appears to be used for values that are completely free (GainNode), clamped (WaveShaperNode.curve) or not explicit (DynamicsCompressorNode). Should we either: * remove all mentions of "nominal" values and explicitly describe the limits and behaviour, or * define "nominal" in the conformance section and use it exclusively for clamped values? -- Olivier ----------------------------- http://www.bbc.co.uk This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated. If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system. Do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the sender immediately. Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received. Further communication will signify your consent to this. -----------------------------
Received on Tuesday, 7 May 2013 10:35:57 UTC