Re: Web Audio API Proposal

On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 12:19 PM, Chris Grigg <chris@chrisgrigg.org> wrote:

> Thanks, Chris.  Obviously you've built a cool and flexible system and
> should be proud of it.
>

Thanks Chris.


> Will look at the sources of the various demos when I get a chance.   Is the
> selection of demos meant to be representative of the most typical web audio
> use cases that we're trying to provision?  Or to demonstrate the functional
> range of the proposed API?
>

A little of both I think.  We tried to design the API to be able to handle
the typical web audio use cases that we could imagine.  My set of demos is
obviously not complete, so I agree we should try to think up some other use
cases and I can try to make more demos.  One demo which is obviously missing
is direct javascript processing.  I've been considering porting one of the
Mozilla demos using my API, and I hope nobody would be offended if I tried
that.


>
> IMHO it's probably a bit premature to settle on any particular design yet
> as basis for the standard.  Probably best to see what use cases get
> consensus support first, and only then evaluate proposals (or create new
> design[s]) against the requirements.  Per the previous discussions here, I
> would expect a tension to arise at some point between implementation
> complexity and portability, which we'll have to work out somehow.  But we're
> not there yet, I don't think.
>
> -- Chris G.
>

I know we haven't settled on anything final yet, but it's my job to work on
this particular system and I will be continuing development on it.  If
people prefer that I don't discuss my proposal and ongoing development on
this list then I can stop and then maybe these discussions can be taken to a
more targeted mailing list within the group.  Either way is fine with me.

Cheers,
Chris