W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-audio@w3.org > July to September 2013

Re: Vote on the data race issue and Gecko shipping timeline

From: Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>
Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2013 20:49:26 +1200
Message-ID: <CAOp6jLYh6pL=srr1e47hZGN3G2qFAKudfk+3vLH1C4EAdYbjjQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Marcus Geelnard <mage@opera.com>
Cc: Ehsan Akhgari <ehsan.akhgari@gmail.com>, "public-audio@w3.org" <public-audio@w3.org>
On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 7:33 PM, Marcus Geelnard <mage@opera.com> wrote:

> If nobody steps up to spec down the details of the shared memory model,
> one solution could be that the vote option becomes just that (start
> specifying the model), for instance (similar to an earlier proposal I've
> made):
> "Keep the current API, using a shared data model. Specify the exact
> behavior of the shared data model in the Web Audio specification to
> guarantee client interoperability, and work together with other parties to
> work out what other specifications need to be updated/written, etc."
> This would be very unfortunate, though, since it's a very high risk option
> (we can't know for sure that it will even succeed, and if not we'd be back
> to square one), and it's definitely much less clear what that option means
> compared to the other two options, both in terms of the actual work that
> has to be done, and how long it would take to finish it.

I don't think it's fair to have a vote-off between two well-specified
options and one vague option.

If no-one cares enough to specify it properly, it shouldn't be on the

Jtehsauts  tshaei dS,o n" Wohfy  Mdaon  yhoaus  eanuttehrotraiitny  eovni
le atrhtohu gthot sf oirng iyvoeu rs ihnesa.r"t sS?o  Whhei csha iids  teoa
stiheer :p atroa lsyazye,d  'mYaonu,r  "sGients  uapr,e  tfaokreg iyvoeunr,
'm aotr  atnod  sgaoy ,h o'mGee.t"  uTph eann dt hwea lmka'n?  gBoutt  uIp
waanndt  wyeonut  thoo mken.o w  *
Received on Friday, 9 August 2013 08:49:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:03:23 UTC