- From: Bernard Aboba <Bernard.Aboba@microsoft.com>
- Date: Fri, 30 May 2014 16:07:28 +0000
- To: "public-ortc@w3.org" <public-ortc@w3.org>, "juberti@google.com" <juberti@google.com>
Justin said: "I think this is a slippery slope - you can get something very basic working quickly, but if it's only for demo purposes, who would want to use this over 1.0?" [BA] Putting aside the question of whether designing for the "very basic" case is a good idea , the existing send/receive methods (which only take n RTCRtpParameters argument) works fine with capability exchange signaling, as long as RTCRtpCapabilities contains the basic information (e.g. preferredPayloadType) to fill in the RTCRtpParameters. Why add complexity to the API just to avoid copying over some dictionary entries from RTCRtpCapabilities to RTCRtpParameters?
Received on Friday, 30 May 2014 16:07:59 UTC