16:47:26 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #audio
16:47:26 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2017/03/02-audio-irc
16:47:28 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
16:47:28 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #audio
16:47:30 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 28346
16:47:30 <Zakim> ok, trackbot
16:47:31 <trackbot> Meeting: Audio Working Group Teleconference
16:47:31 <trackbot> Date: 02 March 2017
16:47:44 <joe> agenda
16:47:52 <joe> zakim, agenda
16:47:52 <Zakim> I don't understand 'agenda', joe
16:48:38 <joe> Agenda?
16:49:08 <joe> Agenda+ Discuss / Finalize V1 Blockers
16:49:19 <joe> Agenda+ Review Pull Request Status
16:49:40 <joe> Agenda+ Discuss ABSN Behavior #95
16:49:56 <joe> Agenda+ Review new issues or those flagged for discussion
16:50:11 <joe> Agenda+ Discuss upcoming Web Audio Conference and/or F2F
16:50:12 <ChrisL> ChrisL has joined #audio
16:50:16 <joe> Agenda+ AOB
16:50:22 <joe> Agenda?
16:58:12 <kawai> kawai has joined #audio
16:59:11 <jdsmith> jdsmith has joined #audio
16:59:21 <rtoyg_m> rtoyg_m has joined #audio
16:59:24 <jdsmith> present+ jdsmith
16:59:28 <joe> present+ joe
16:59:59 <rtoyg_m> present+ rtoyg_m
17:05:05 <ChrisL> scribenick: ChrisL
17:05:14 <ChrisL> chair: Joe
17:05:17 <joe> next agendum
17:05:32 <joe> https://github.com/WebAudio/web-audio-api/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3A%22V1+Blocker%22
17:05:51 <ChrisL> joe: these ones have to be closed before CR
17:06:32 <ChrisL> (7 open issues) are these the right ones? compare to webaudio v1 tag
17:06:43 <joe> https://github.com/WebAudio/web-audio-api/milestone/1
17:06:56 <ChrisL> matt: blocker means any other ones could be moved to v.next
17:07:22 <hongchan> hongchan has joined #audio
17:07:51 <rtoyg_m> https://github.com/WebAudio/web-audio-api/issues/1116
17:07:52 <ChrisL> hongchan: need to fix the periodic wave one
17:08:17 <ChrisL> jerry: so it is just make the IDL valid
17:08:26 <ChrisL> joe: and it has a PR we could review
17:08:32 <ChrisL> matt: label added
17:08:50 <ChrisL> joe 1138 will be part of fix to 95
17:09:26 <ChrisL> ... same for 353
17:10:21 <ChrisL> hongchan: 32 must/may
17:10:42 <ChrisL> ChrisL: yes but don't want to mess up other PRs as it will be a lot of small changes
17:11:17 <ChrisL> joe: ok so these are the real v1, vs the more likely to be v.next
17:11:50 <ChrisL> matt: ppl can add issue blockers after the call
17:12:09 <ChrisL> joe: but we need a cutoff. hoped it was today. what is a good date?
17:12:15 <ChrisL> matt: tomorrow!
17:13:09 <ChrisL> joe: ok quick status on each blocker
17:13:43 <ChrisL> joe: audio buffer constructor
17:14:03 <ChrisL> matt: paul said these four need rays comments to be addressed, mostly done.
17:14:07 <ChrisL> joe: date?
17:14:27 <ChrisL> matt: no. More time in next 3 months than last 3.
17:15:18 <ChrisL> joe: 116 has a PR from ray,
17:15:25 <ChrisL> ray: OK to lead on that
17:15:39 <ChrisL> joe: 1089
17:16:03 <ChrisL> matt: asked at BBC, hoped to have something back, will add once i have their feedback
17:16:27 <ChrisL> ChrisL: smpte order for all of them?
17:16:30 <ChrisL> matt: yes
17:16:49 <ChrisL> jdsmith: we have different orders that may not be the smpte one, yet
17:17:42 <ChrisL> joe: 1079 not done yet, but easy to get to now I am back. we downsized it
17:17:53 <ChrisL> joe: 833 has no owner.
17:18:03 <ChrisL> ray: editor discretion
17:18:47 <ChrisL> (bikeshed vs respec summary)
17:19:15 <ChrisL> ray: tab would help us with any conversion issues
17:19:44 <ChrisL> matt: should we switch after CR?
17:19:56 <ChrisL> ray: respec no longer supports the IDL we use
17:20:48 <ChrisL> joe: resolution from call today is that switching to bs is scary and excessive before CR. but we need to fix up the IDL
17:21:28 <ChrisL> joe: issue 95 has its own agenda item today
17:21:43 <ChrisL> joe: dynamics compressor node 10
17:22:32 <ChrisL> matt: reads paul - algo is defined, no more outstanding queries, spec remains to be written. not clear if we can use same ting as an expander
17:22:38 <joe> https://github.com/WebAudio/web-audio-api/issues/10#issuecomment-267675496
17:22:40 <ChrisL> s/ting/thing/
17:23:43 <ChrisL> joe: no spec text to review at this time, just notes
17:24:35 <ChrisL> chris: seems there is still an issue on the exact soft knee curve
17:24:39 <ChrisL> joe: agreed
17:24:44 <joe> next agendum
17:25:01 <joe> https://github.com/WebAudio/web-audio-api/pulls
17:25:50 <ChrisL> joe: 1144 and 1143 not finished yet
17:26:03 <ChrisL> ray: mostly mine need reviewed
17:28:29 <ChrisL> joe: 1147 we are not doing
17:28:43 <ChrisL> ray: close, and point to the other one
17:29:16 <ChrisL> joe: 1141, why is it not merged yet. paul reviewed it. so I can assign myself to respond
17:30:11 <ChrisL> joe: 1065 waiting on paul and karl
17:30:34 <ChrisL> joe; parts of 0124 subsumed by 95
17:30:54 <ChrisL> s/0124/1024/
17:30:57 <joe> next agendum
17:32:26 <ChrisL> ray: basic algo great when playback rate is positive. but negative rate, it does loop the are backwards, not clear how that falls out from the algorithm given
17:32:37 <ChrisL> joe: let me explain why I think this is done
17:33:00 <joe> https://github.com/WebAudio/web-audio-api/pull/1143#issuecomment-283500287
17:33:38 <ChrisL> joe: lets have a rawgit link to review
17:34:01 <joe> https://rawgit.com/WebAudio/web-audio-api/057d63c29697af76c983702339fd968c225e5e88/index.html
17:34:18 <joe> https://rawgit.com/WebAudio/web-audio-api/057d63c29697af76c983702339fd968c225e5e88/index.html#playback-AudioBufferSourceNode
17:35:44 <ChrisL> joe: adjust buffer time by a negative amount. computed pb rate is -1 so we subtract
17:35:50 <ChrisL> ray: good so far
17:36:51 <ChrisL> joe: effective buffer time does change, as it is getting smaller, and at the point where it gets to - what loop iteration are we in the iddle of?
17:37:05 <ChrisL> ray: none, we just started.
17:37:41 <ChrisL> joe: ok, but if you played one loop iteration going backwards, you hear just that backwards then nothing. no looping
17:37:55 <ChrisL> ray: it would loop if we were going fwds
17:38:31 <ChrisL> joe: play backweards from an offset is the reverse of forwards *including* the fact that only some number of loop iterations would have occured.
17:39:25 <ChrisL> joe: can be an attack phase in front of the loop, you should get that too.
17:40:09 <ChrisL> ray: agree, but text does not do that. buffer time decrements to zero and there is no check for loop conditions
17:40:30 <ChrisL> joe: oh, crap something is missing!
17:40:54 <ChrisL> ... a change I made to address this is missing - oh, no it sn't. found it
17:41:16 <ChrisL> joe: say effective buffer time is 3 loops on.
17:41:46 <ChrisL> ray: so next step is not greater than loop end so is never modified.
17:42:06 <ChrisL> ... we go back to step 6
17:42:29 <ChrisL> joe: right, so offset is in the middle which means there is only one loop iteration
17:44:03 <ChrisL> joe: it would loop if offset exceeded the length of the buffer
17:45:14 <ChrisL> chris: so you are unrolling the loop, the virtual buffer has all the loop iterations one after the other
17:45:19 <ChrisL> joe: exactly
17:46:03 <ChrisL> ray: ebt would warap to beginning but then gets decremented so it is in the middle of the loop
17:46:15 <ChrisL> I think a diagram would be helpful here
17:46:38 <ChrisL> joe: step 3 is where the wrapping happens
17:46:56 <ChrisL> s/warap/wrap/
17:47:40 <ChrisL> ray: your algorithm does not do that
17:47:48 <ChrisL> joe: if offset exceeds...
17:48:44 <ChrisL> ray: it never ever loops
17:48:50 <ChrisL> joe: it loops once
17:49:00 <ChrisL> ray: should loop forever
17:49:32 <ChrisL> joe: wen the playhead is in the loop, you want it to never leave
17:51:58 <ChrisL> joe: not clear how to oget both uses together, we trap the play head and reverse out everything so far
17:52:12 <ChrisL> ray: taht is not what people expect
17:52:37 <ChrisL> ... play the loop, in reverse, forever
17:53:25 <ChrisL> chris: can the api express both use cases?
17:54:03 <ChrisL> joe: developer needs to indicate what they want
17:54:14 <ChrisL> ray: just turning looping off
17:54:43 <ChrisL> ... but doing it yourself defeats the purpose
17:55:11 <ChrisL> ray: loop end and loop start could be changed live
17:55:16 <ChrisL> joe: can add that
17:56:30 <ChrisL> joe: need to think on this. any other opinions on the call?
17:56:52 <ChrisL> ray: maybe a new issue om the desired behaviour?
17:56:59 <ChrisL> joe: won't help really
17:57:31 <ChrisL> joe: we can see what that language looks like
17:57:43 <ChrisL> ray: isolate the different use cases
17:57:49 <joe> next agendum
17:58:20 <ChrisL> matt: will send email round about web audio conference
17:59:05 <ChrisL> joe: next call in 2 weeks
17:59:08 <ChrisL> adjourned
17:59:14 <ChrisL> rrsagent, make minutes
17:59:14 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/03/02-audio-minutes.html ChrisL
17:59:34 <ChrisL> rrsagent, make logs public
17:59:38 <ChrisL> rrsagent, make minutes
17:59:38 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/03/02-audio-minutes.html ChrisL
18:00:27 <ChrisL> joe do you want to send the minutes or shall I? any cleanup needed?
18:02:30 <ChrisL> (sent)
18:09:26 <ghaudiobot> [web-audio-api] joeberkovitz pushed 1 new commit to 95-absn-playback: https://github.com/WebAudio/web-audio-api/commit/5d4a6e8b1c3603b5a923f7b0361e2f2078c25389
18:09:26 <ghaudiobot> web-audio-api/95-absn-playback 5d4a6e8 joeberkovitz: Add language to “fold” backwards iterations through the loop, but only when the loop has been entered at least once.
18:31:03 <hongchan> hongchan has joined #audio
18:32:47 <kawai> kawai has joined #audio
18:51:02 <kawai> kawai has joined #audio
19:38:42 <ChrisL> ChrisL has joined #audio