- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 03 Sep 2013 16:11:38 +0000
- To: public-audio@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17367 --- Comment #10 from paul@paul.cx <padenot@mozilla.com> --- (In reply to comment #9) > > In light of this use-case for modifying the `type` attribute on a playing > > OscillatorNode, we could spec it this way: > > - Considering the node support "custom" waveforms, possibly out of phase > > with the basic waveform types, we have two options: > > (1) The phase is preserved when switching between basic oscillator type > > (we need to spec coherent phase among basic types for that, this is bug > > 17366). Switching to/from "custom" type resets the phase ; > > (2) Switching the type resets the phase, letting everything in the hands > > of the author ; > > > > I'm in favor of adopting (2), for consistency. > > Consistency with what? The author doesn't have any phase control (other > than doing the math, figuring out precisely when the earliest they can > switch, and aligning phase that way). I would lean toward (1) for that > reason. Consistency between switching between two basic oscillator and switching between a basic oscillator and a custom waveform (i.e. reset in both cases). I agree than (2) is probably okay as well, since it means less work for the author. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 3 September 2013 16:11:40 UTC