Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: AudioContext.outputLatency

Hello all, We landed the metric collection CL (https://crrev.com/c/3413794) and have gathered some data: # Notable latency range - Android Chrome: Mean 40.96, Peak 3~5ms - Chrome OS: Mean 46.37, Peak at 15ms - Mac OS X: Mean 935.36, Peak at 17ms - Linux (dev): Mean 45.32, Peak at 33ms -

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: AudioContext.outputLatency

Will do. Ty Joe. On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 1:32 PM Joe Medley wrote: > Please update the Chrome Status entry as soon as you know. (That will > inform me as well.) > Joe Medley | Technical Writer, Chrome DevRel | jmed...@google.com | > 816-678-7195 <(816)%20678-7195> > *If an API's not documented

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: AudioContext.outputLatency

Please update the Chrome Status entry as soon as you know. (That will inform me as well.) Joe Medley | Technical Writer, Chrome DevRel | jmed...@google.com | 816-678-7195 *If an API's not documented it doesn't exist.* On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 12:32 PM Ajay Rahatekar wrote: > The metrics are

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: AudioContext.outputLatency

The metrics are landing in Jan. So likely shipping in 99. -Ajay On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 11:54 AM Joe Medley wrote: > Is this shipping in 98? > > On Wednesday, December 15, 2021 at 9:02:09 AM UTC-8 hongchan wrote: > >> Thank you all! >> >> 1. I'll land the metrics CL and follow up here. >> 2.

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: AudioContext.outputLatency

Is this shipping in 98? On Wednesday, December 15, 2021 at 9:02:09 AM UTC-8 hongchan wrote: > Thank you all! > > 1. I'll land the metrics CL and follow up here. > 2. The discussion in the WebKit mailing list is ongoing, so I'll report > back when it's done. > > Cheers, > Hongchan > > > On Wed,

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: AudioContext.outputLatency

Thank you all! 1. I'll land the metrics CL and follow up here. 2. The discussion in the WebKit mailing list is ongoing, so I'll report back when it's done. Cheers, Hongchan On Wed, Dec 15, 2021 at 8:58 AM Chris Harrelson wrote: > LGTM3. > > On Wed, Dec 15, 2021 at 8:47 AM Mike Taylor >

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: AudioContext.outputLatency

LGTM3. On Wed, Dec 15, 2021 at 8:47 AM Mike Taylor wrote: > LGTM2 w/ same condition. > > On 12/15/21 11:47 AM, Yoav Weiss wrote: > > LGTM1 conditional on those metrics landing (but no need to wait for data > from the metrics to come in). > > On Monday, December 6, 2021 at 3:22:26 PM UTC+1 Mike

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: AudioContext.outputLatency

LGTM2 w/ same condition. On 12/15/21 11:47 AM, Yoav Weiss wrote: LGTM1 conditional on those metrics landing (but no need to wait for data from the metrics to come in). On Monday, December 6, 2021 at 3:22:26 PM UTC+1 Mike Taylor wrote: To circle back - last week we (myself + some other

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: AudioContext.outputLatency

LGTM1 conditional on those metrics landing (but no need to wait for data from the metrics to come in). On Monday, December 6, 2021 at 3:22:26 PM UTC+1 Mike Taylor wrote: > To circle back - last week we (myself + some other privacy/anti-covert > tracking reviewers) met with some folks working

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: AudioContext.outputLatency

To circle back - last week we (myself + some other privacy/anti-covert tracking reviewers) met with some folks working on this feature. We ended up with an AI for Hongchan to land metrics on the values that getOutputTimestamp would produce (if called, when a new AudioContext is created, IIRC)

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: AudioContext.outputLatency

So are y'all planning to deprecate and remove `getOutputTimestamp` once this ships? If so, that sounds reasonable. I note Chris asked y'all to file for a webkit signal upthread. Did that happen? On Tuesday, November 30, 2021 at 12:54:17 AM UTC+1 hongchan wrote: > I agree that outputLatency is

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: AudioContext.outputLatency

I agree that outputLatency is better in terms of both usability and interoperability. FYI, the counter shows getOutputTimestamp is about 0.001% and there are no partners who are using this API: https://chromestatus.com/metrics/feature/popularity#AudioContextGetOutputTimestamp On Mon, Nov 22,

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: AudioContext.outputLatency

Re: privacy discussion, Hongchan and I scheduled to meet with Paul Jensen next week. Also, I recently determined that this new WebAudio API (outputLatency) is largely redundant with an existing API (getOutputTimestamp()). https://github.com/WebAudio/web-audio-api/issues/2461 Chrome has

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: AudioContext.outputLatency

Thanks for the clarification, Yoav! I hope the mitigation approach in the previous comment makes sense from the privacy perspective, but it will hurt the usability/value of this API significantly. For the privacy-focused discussion, should I use other venues rather than this I2S thread? Cheers,

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: AudioContext.outputLatency

Apologies, I misread the discussion. A spec issue is indeed not needed, as this is already covered. >From my perspective, since this exposes active entropy, the fact that it exposes more data than the (passively exposed) platform is not prohibitive on its own. At the same time, it'd be good to

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: AudioContext.outputLatency

> If the reported value is incorrect, the A/V synchronization won't be possible. (Perhaps chcunningham@ can say more about this use case.) The typical video player design drives the clock with audio. In short, you send buffers of audio to the OS, use the latency value to know when those buffers

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: AudioContext.outputLatency

Hi Yoav, Could you clarify what needs to be discussed from the spec side? The feature (and its behavior) is properly specified, and its privacy aspect is already reviewed by W3C: https://github.com/WebAudio/web-audio-api/issues/1498 (outputLatency)

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: AudioContext.outputLatency

Hey folks! It seems like there are some things to figure out here before shipping. Could y'all file a spec issue to discuss this with the broader community? On Tuesday, November 16, 2021 at 6:16:14 PM UTC+1 hongchan wrote: > Thanks for the feedback, Mike. This is really helpful! > > Mitigation

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: AudioContext.outputLatency

On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 7:52 AM 'Hongchan Choi' via blink-dev < blink-dev@chromium.org> wrote: > Thanks for the review, Yoav. My responses are inline: > > On Sun, Nov 14, 2021 at 10:48 PM Yoav Weiss > wrote: > >> >> >> On Fri, Nov 12, 2021 at 5:33 PM 'Ajay Rahatekar' via blink-dev < >>

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: AudioContext.outputLatency

Thanks for the feedback, Mike. This is really helpful! Mitigation strategies include adding jitter (dithering) and quantization so > that the exact skew is incorrectly reported > This bit refers to the randomization mechanism deployed by other browsers, but this approach defeats the purpose of

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: AudioContext.outputLatency

I suppose it would be nice to do some testing to verify the idea that there's a small number of platform + audio device pairs. I was hoping Mozilla's hardware survey might have something on that, but it doesn't track speakers. Just from some

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: AudioContext.outputLatency

On 11/15/21 10:56 AM, Hongchan Choi wrote: On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 6:49 AM Mike Taylor wrote: On 11/15/21 1:47 AM, Yoav Weiss wrote: On Fri, Nov 12, 2021 at 5:33 PM 'Ajay Rahatekar' via blink-dev wrote: TAG review status Completed: Web Audio API

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: AudioContext.outputLatency

On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 6:49 AM Mike Taylor wrote: > On 11/15/21 1:47 AM, Yoav Weiss wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 12, 2021 at 5:33 PM 'Ajay Rahatekar' via blink-dev < > blink-dev@chromium.org> wrote: > >> >> TAG review status >> >> Completed: Web Audio API specification is W3C Recommendation. >> >>

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: AudioContext.outputLatency

On 11/15/21 1:47 AM, Yoav Weiss wrote: On Fri, Nov 12, 2021 at 5:33 PM 'Ajay Rahatekar' via blink-dev wrote: TAG review status Completed: Web Audio API specification is W3C Recommendation. Risks There is a risk of the feature being used for fingerprinting.

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: AudioContext.outputLatency

On Fri, Nov 12, 2021 at 5:33 PM 'Ajay Rahatekar' via blink-dev < blink-dev@chromium.org> wrote: > Contact emails > > hongc...@chromium.org, ajayrahate...@google.com > > Explainer > > N/A - the specification (W3C Recommendation) is already published. > Regardless, could you add a few sentences