W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-audio@w3.org > October to December 2011

Re: TPAC F2F and Spec Proposals (was: Attendance for the AudioWG F2F meeting on Monday, 31 October)

From: Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 07:46:20 +1300
Message-ID: <CAOp6jLZCPfyrrFE=jGHx6OEF+EUQ0xVKUuP8zBaZzB9AoLEzTA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Joseph Berkovitz <joe@noteflight.com>
Cc: Alistair MacDonald <al@signedon.com>, Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>, tmichel@w3.org, Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>, public-audio@w3.org, mgregan@mozilla.com
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 1:40 AM, Joseph Berkovitz <joe@noteflight.com>wrote:

> My question doesn't so much pertain to the API, which can be changed -- it
> has more to do with whether a streams implementation optimized for N-way
> telecommunication sessions  of duration M (where N typically < 10 and M > 1
> minute) is going to perform well with 100s of tiny little streams (N > 100
> and M < 1 sec).

I see no reason why they can't both be handled efficiently.

I haven't started out by optimizing for the RTC case.

"If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in
us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our
sins and purify us from all unrighteousness. If we claim we have not sinned,
we make him out to be a liar and his word is not in us." [1 John 1:8-10]
Received on Tuesday, 18 October 2011 18:46:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:49:57 UTC