- From: Ingar Arntzen via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 29 Feb 2016 10:18:07 +0000
- To: public-webtiming@w3.org
ingararntzen has just created a new issue for
https://github.com/webtiming/timingobject:
== Multiple timing objects from same (online) timing provider ==
The spec defines a 1:1 relationship between a timing provider and a
timing object. The timing provider is a very small thing, essentially:
- 1 skew
- 1 vector
The timing object wraps this to provide some additional logic and an
API.
In practice though, applications might well require more than one
timing object. For example, a multi-device slide show may use one
timing object to control the progression of the slide show, and other
timing objects to control media within each slide. Furthermore, in the
online scenario it may be practical that these timing objects are
hosted by the same online timing provider. This would provide
opportunity to multiplex the communication of multiple timing objects
across a single connection, and it would also enable the sharing of
timing provider clock - see #22.
Especially, with respect to clock sharing the current spec is a bit
inconvenient. The 1:1 relationship dictates that each timing object
independently has to receive skew updates and maintain a timing
provider clock internally. This is redundant if timing objects are
connected to the same online timing provider.
To fix this, a basic idea would be to redefine the timing provider so
that it includes
- 1 skew
- N named vectors
This would have some implications for the constructions and of timing
objects.
For example:
```js
var tp; // timing provider
var to = new TimingObject({provider:tp, name:"nameofvector"});
```
This would require the TimingObject internals to maintain one static,
singleton clock (#22) per unique timing provider, and route skew
updates there intstead of to the timing objects.
Please view or discuss this issue at
https://github.com/webtiming/timingobject/issues/23 using your GitHub
account
Received on Monday, 29 February 2016 10:18:08 UTC