Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Audio WG recharter #289

Closed
svgeesus opened this issue Oct 25, 2021 · 28 comments
Closed

Audio WG recharter #289

svgeesus opened this issue Oct 25, 2021 · 28 comments

Comments

@svgeesus
Copy link
Contributor

svgeesus commented Oct 25, 2021

Audio WG is chartered until 2022-03-04.
Web Audio API 1.0 became W3C Recommendation, 17 June 2021
Plan is to recharter with same deliverables to continue work on Web Audio API 2.0

WG will meet at TPAC to discuss any charter considerations. No charter draft yet

@svgeesus svgeesus created this issue from a note in Strategy Team's Incubation Pipeline (Funnel) (Chartering) Oct 25, 2021
@svgeesus svgeesus self-assigned this Oct 25, 2021
@plehegar
Copy link
Member

cc @mdjp @hoch

@svgeesus
Copy link
Contributor Author

Charter draft for discussion and review

Previous charter

Created from the latest charter template. Drops Web Audio API 2.0 in favor of continuing to update the existing Web Audio API Recommendation. Drops "A specification for efficient low-level audio hardware device access" which was in the previous charter but was not developed, and will now simply be part of Web Audio API.

Proposed charter is on GitHub

@svgeesus
Copy link
Contributor Author

@mdjp @hoch

@mdjp
Copy link

mdjp commented Jan 18, 2022

This looks good to me, I think that removing the V2 reference was the main change that needed to be made. One admin comment, the group currently meets fortnightly rather than weekly.

@himorin
Copy link

himorin commented Jan 18, 2022

diff from previous (current) to proposed: https://services.w3.org/htmldiff?doc1=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2F2020%2F12%2Faudio-wg-charter.html&doc2=https%3A%2F%2Fw3c.github.io%2Fcharter-drafts%2F2022%2Faudio-2022.html

it seems a link to the currently running charter is missing in charter history

@hoch
Copy link

hoch commented Jan 18, 2022

Looks good to me as well.

@svgeesus
Copy link
Contributor Author

The diff looks more complex because the charter template has also changed quite considerably since the previous charter was created.

@himorin
Copy link

himorin commented Jan 26, 2022

No comment/request from i18n.

@samuelweiler
Copy link
Member

samuelweiler commented Jan 28, 2022

@svgeesus Do you want issues raised in this thread or....? (This is one of the questions in our issue template.) (Also, the "on Github" link above points to the template.)

@samuelweiler
Copy link
Member

No privacy nor security issues. Consider expanding the acronym "PCM" on first use.

@svgeesus
Copy link
Contributor Author

svgeesus commented Feb 7, 2022

(Also, the "on Github" link above points to the template

Fixed with w3c/charter-drafts@69d7245

Consider expanding the acronym "PCM" on first use

Fixed with w3c/charter-drafts@20f84a4

@svgeesus
Copy link
Contributor Author

svgeesus commented Feb 7, 2022

@wseltzer this is ready to go to W3M

@svgeesus
Copy link
Contributor Author

Two W3M reviewers allocated 9 Feb, expected to report 23 Feb

@plehegar
Copy link
Member

Should we list Media WG as a dependency? @tidoust

Link "Audio Working Group home page." in saection 6 needs an update.

@svgeesus
Copy link
Contributor Author

Link "Audio Working Group home page." in saection 6 needs an update.

Fixed

@tidoust
Copy link
Member

tidoust commented Feb 15, 2022

Should we list Media WG as a dependency? @tidoust

The Media WG charter lists the Audio Working Group in its coordination section, although without noting anything specific. Audio is in scope of WebCodecs in particular and e.g. provides more flexible decoding capabilities as decodeAudioData, so it makes sense to me to note that the two groups will somehow coordinate. I wouldn't call that a "dependency" though.

@svgeesus
Copy link
Contributor Author

One admin comment, the group currently meets fortnightly rather than weekly.

Fixed

@svgeesus
Copy link
Contributor Author

@svgeesus
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks for the timely review, @plehegar !

@svgeesus
Copy link
Contributor Author

Alan has also signed off on this so it is ready to go for AC review. I will create the WBS.

@plehegar
Copy link
Member

@svgeesus
Copy link
Contributor Author

Sent for AC review Mon, 21 Feb 2022, deadline midnight Boston 2022-03-21

@plehegar
Copy link
Member

plehegar commented Apr 9, 2022

@hoch
Copy link

hoch commented Apr 10, 2022

I would like to help clarify the intent and the roadmap of the group, but it'd be really helpful if I can understand what is exactly missing.

@svgeesus
Copy link
Contributor Author

The formal objection has multiple parts and I have been discussing them part by part with Chaals on w3c-archive@w3.org. So far two of them have been withdrawn, without changes to the charter or the charter template. Working on the third one now.

@svgeesus
Copy link
Contributor Author

As of yesterday, all portions of the formal objection have been withdrawn. An updated charter has agreement from all commentors | diff, compared to the charter sent to the AC

Today I am documenting the changes and then asking W3M to approve the charter

@hoch
Copy link

hoch commented May 31, 2022

Great to hear that! Thanks for your help, @svgeesus and @plehegar!

@svgeesus
Copy link
Contributor Author

New charter announced 14 June

@svgeesus svgeesus moved this from Chartering to Strategy Work Concluded in Strategy Team's Incubation Pipeline (Funnel) Jun 16, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment