- From: Chris Wilson <cwilso@google.com>
- Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 10:22:46 -0800
- To: Olivier Thereaux <olivier.thereaux@bbc.co.uk>
- Cc: Chris Lowis <chris.lowis@gmail.com>, Audio WG <public-audio@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAJK2wqXKFWrRnr7MyjTUQrOvsVnfEMdZh=_qt96LiAnsuNc+Wg@mail.gmail.com>
As proposed/discussed by Alex and myself, I don't know if this would be a breaking change in practice; the "syntactic sugar" methods would be the current create* methods, so it shouldn't cause that much disruption. On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 9:07 AM, Olivier Thereaux < olivier.thereaux@bbc.co.uk> wrote: > Hi Chris, > > On 16 Feb 2014, at 15:20, Chris Lowis <chris.lowis@gmail.com> wrote: > > Alternatively, working with this reminded me of the point raised by the > TAG[3] about introducing constructors for each of the node types, and > having the factory methods on the contexts themselves available (through a > library?) as “syntactic sugar”. This would be a breaking change, but it > would certainly simplify the specification of the two types of context. > > > > [3] https://github.com/WebAudio/web-audio-api/issues/250 > > Also related to https://github.com/WebAudio/web-audio-api/issues/257 ? > > As “breaking changes” go, this one sounds fairly drastic. What would the > harm be in keeping the context method in addition to constructors? Too > sweet? > > -- > 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, 18 February 2014 18:23:15 UTC