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

Re: [web-audio-api] (setTargetValueAtTime): AudioParam.setTargetValueAtTime is misleading and underdefined (#152)

From: Olivier Thereaux <notifications@github.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2013 07:30:02 -0700
To: WebAudio/web-audio-api <web-audio-api@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <WebAudio/web-audio-api/issues/152/24244554@github.com>
> [Original comment](https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17334#2) by Olivier Thereaux on W3C Bugzilla. Thu, 05 Jul 2012 14:34:01 GMT

Mailing-list discussion on this topic between Ray Bellis, Chris Rogers, Marcus Geelnard and myself:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-audio/2012AprJun/thread.html#msg856

Marcus has a pretty good summary, and raises something interesting:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-audio/2012AprJun/0865.html

«
Once you understand what the function does, the name makes sense. However,  
the name alone does not make it easy to understand what it does.

I think that the confusion (at least for me) is that "setTargetValue" is  
very similar to "setValue", and I fear that many will have them mixed up.  
Generally speaking, the "set" term indicates a zero-duration operation.  
I'd much rather see that methods that cause gradual changes use a  
consistent naming convention, excluding the term "set".

I think that a more appropriate name could be "approachValueAtTime" or  
"startApproachingValueAtTime".

Similarly the name "setValueCurveAtTime" would do better without "set".  
Any suggestions? (I'm out of ideas right now)
»

---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/WebAudio/web-audio-api/issues/152#issuecomment-24244554
Received on Wednesday, 11 September 2013 14:30:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:03:24 UTC