ISSUE-6: (Bugzilla 17388) AudioParam constructor
audioparam
(Bugzilla 17388) AudioParam constructor
- State:
- CLOSED
- Product:
- Web Audio API
- Raised by:
- Jussi Kalliokoski
- Opened on:
- 2012-03-21
- Description:
- Raised by Jussi, going back to a discussion back in spring 2011:
[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-audio/2012JanMar/0374.html
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-audio/2011AprJun/0085.html
[3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-audio/2011AprJun/0086.html
[4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-audio/2011AprJun/0087.html
[5] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-audio/2011AprJun/0089.html
[6] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-audio/2011AprJun/0101.html
[7] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-audio/2011AprJun/0103.html
The discussion focused on the need for an AudioParam constructor in the context of a JavaScriptAudioNode.
Jussi then suggested
partial interface JavaScriptAudioNode {
AudioParam createAudioParam(name, defaultValue, minValue, maxValue,
units);
}
partial interface AudioProcessingEvent {
Float32Array getParamValues(name);
}
With which CRogers agreed, but suggested to pass the AudioParam instead of name to getParamValues().
Thread: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-audio/2012JanMar/thread.html#msg412
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-audio/2012JanMar/0437.html - Related Actions Items:
ACTION-43 on Alistair MacDonald to Ask for feedback on making ISSUE-6 a "nice to have" that we may not include in version 1 of the web audio API - due 2012-04-09, closed- Related emails:
- [web-audio-api] (audioparam): AudioParam constructor (#134) (from notifications@github.com on 2013-09-11)
- Re: Next teleconference : 6th June (from Olivier.Thereaux@bbc.co.uk on 2012-06-04)
- Re: Next teleconference : 6th June (from mage@opera.com on 2012-06-04)
- Re: Aiding early implementations of the web audio API (from jussi.kalliokoski@gmail.com on 2012-05-22)
- Re: Updates to Web Audio API editor's draft (from srikumarks@gmail.com on 2012-05-09)
- Minutes of audio WG teleconference, 2012-05-02 (from olivier.thereaux@bbc.co.uk on 2012-05-03)
- Regrets (from schepers@w3.org on 2012-05-02)
- RE: [Agenda] W3C Audio WG Teleconference, 2nd May 2012 (from tross@microsoft.com on 2012-05-02)
- Re: [Agenda] W3C Audio WG Teleconference, 2nd May 2012 (from gabriel.cardoso@inria.fr on 2012-05-01)
- [Agenda] W3C Audio WG Teleconference, 2nd May 2012 (from al@signedon.com on 2012-04-30)
- Minutes of audio WG teleconference, 2012-04-02 (from olivier.thereaux@bbc.co.uk on 2012-04-05)
- Re: Schedule: Next Telecon 2nd April (from joe@noteflight.com on 2012-04-02)
- Re: Schedule: Next Telecon 2nd April (from olivier.thereaux@bbc.co.uk on 2012-04-02)
- Schedule: Next Telecon 2nd April (from al@signedon.com on 2012-03-30)
- Re: Audio-ISSUE-6 (audioparam): AudioParam constructor [Web Audio API] (from olivier.thereaux@bbc.co.uk on 2012-03-21)
- Audio-ISSUE-6 (audioparam): AudioParam constructor [Web Audio API] (from sysbot+tracker@w3.org on 2012-03-21)
Related notes:
From the minutes of the audio wg teleconf on April 2nd:
The discussion on making it possible for the javascriptnodes to create audioparams for themselves reached some early consensus on making it a "nice to have", perhaps something to include in a future version of the web audio spec. Al will be gathering more input on this. (See ACTION-43).
Closed per resolution at the 2012-05-02 audio WG teleconference. We will keep this in a "backlog" of potential features for a next version of the spec.
Olivier Thereaux, 3 May 2012, 06:26:36First of all, sorry for being late with input to this. I hope I did the right thing here by re-opening the issue (?).
Adding to the previous discussions, I strongly feel that this is an important feature of the API.
Without the ability to have AudioParams on JavaScriptAudioNodes, it would not be possible to re-implement the native nodes for instance, e.g. for testing and reference implementations. It also makes it far more difficult to do drop-in replacements in an existing graph (e.g. if a developer wanted to make a custom filter node to replace a BiQuadFilterNode in an existing graph).
Generally speaking, it seems logical that the JavaScriptAudioNode is the most generic node with which you can implement "everything". Hence, support for AudioParam seems like a fundamental requirement.
[MikeSmith]: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17388
5 Jun 2012, 13:31:58Display change log
