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

Clarification about pending data on device disconnection #133

Open
toyoshim opened this issue Mar 30, 2015 · 3 comments
Open

Clarification about pending data on device disconnection #133

toyoshim opened this issue Mar 30, 2015 · 3 comments
Assignees
Labels
class: substantive https://www.w3.org/2023/Process-20230612/#correction-classes status: ready for editing Enough information should be available to implement this change in the spec
Milestone

Comments

@toyoshim
Copy link
Contributor

Should we keep all pending data that were sent with timestamps even after the device is disconnected, and send it if the device is available again when the specified time arrives?
It would be better to explain it explicitly in section 8. MIDIConnectionEvent Interface.

@cwilso
Copy link
Contributor

cwilso commented Mar 30, 2015

What do you think we should do?

@toyoshim
Copy link
Contributor Author

I feel keeping pending data as possible by default would be consistent with other auto reconnection behaviors. If developers do not want to hold it, they can simply call clear() on disconnection event.

But data without timestamp, and data having overdue timestamp will be dropped on time.

@agoode
Copy link

agoode commented Mar 31, 2015

The Core MIDI behavior is to send pending data if the device is connected at the scheduled time. If the device is not connected, the data is lost. Disconnection doesn't clear pending data.

This behavior seems fine for Web MIDI.

Step 9 of the open algorithm in the current spec suggests that data will queue in some way, which we may not want. Some decision and clarification would be good.

@cwilso cwilso added the status: ready for editing Enough information should be available to implement this change in the spec label Jun 1, 2015
@cwilso cwilso added this to the V1 milestone Jun 1, 2015
@cwilso cwilso self-assigned this Jun 1, 2015
@mjwilson-google mjwilson-google added the class: substantive https://www.w3.org/2023/Process-20230612/#correction-classes label Sep 13, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
class: substantive https://www.w3.org/2023/Process-20230612/#correction-classes status: ready for editing Enough information should be available to implement this change in the spec
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants