This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.

Bug 17694 - Per-track and global control
Summary: Per-track and global control
Status: CLOSED NEEDSINFO
Alias: None
Product: AudioWG
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Web Audio Processing: Use Cases and Requirements (show other bugs)
Version: unspecified
Hardware: PC All
: P2 normal
Target Milestone: TBD
Assignee: Olivier Thereaux
QA Contact: public-audio
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2012-07-05 14:17 UTC by Olivier Thereaux
Modified: 2012-09-20 06:59 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:

Attachments

Description Olivier Thereaux 2012-07-05 14:17:06 UTC 
From the “Review of Web Audio Processing: Use Cases and Requirements”
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-audio/2012AprJun/0852.html

Need a requirement to allow both per-track and global (with the Web application) control of each audio channel / track / whatever for volume, mute, pause / restart, and autoplay. I think this is implied by the use cases but not spelled out in the requirements.
Comment 1 Philip Jägenstedt 2012-07-24 10:01:12 UTC 
The way the problem is stated, it sounds like it's talking about HTMLMediaElement, which has volume, mute, play/pause and autoplay, whereas the Web Audio API does not. INVALID?
Comment 2 Olivier Thereaux 2012-07-26 16:17:54 UTC 
(In reply to comment #1)
> The way the problem is stated, it sounds like it's talking about
> HTMLMediaElement, which has volume, mute, play/pause and autoplay, whereas the
> Web Audio API does not. INVALID?

I agree that the requirement for play/pause is irrelevant in the context of web audio processing. Trying to think about anything else to extract, or maybe the rest is well covered by Bug #17695?
Comment 3 Philip Jägenstedt 2012-07-27 08:50:34 UTC 
Maybe, I'd resolve this as NEEDSINFO if the PFWG want to clarify.
Comment 4 Olivier Thereaux 2012-08-16 14:22:01 UTC 
(In reply to comment #3)
> Maybe, I'd resolve this as NEEDSINFO if the PFWG want to clarify.

Sounds reasonable.
Comment 5 Olivier Thereaux 2012-09-20 06:59:06 UTC 
Hearing no objection after a few weeks, closing.