W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webrtc@w3.org > April 2012

Data API question: Resolution

From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2012 16:25:06 +0200
Message-ID: <4F9D4F42.2050705@alvestrand.no>
To: WEBRTC WG <public-webrtc@w3.org>
     After having 2 weeks to discuss the API questions in the form I 
raised them:

A: Relationship between data "channels" and WebSockets
A1: Should the data "channel" be similar enough to WebSockets that one 
could have (library) code that uses both interchangeably (with 
appropriate options set)?

A2: Should that similarity be documented by having the data "channel" 
API implement the WebSockets API interface?


B: Relationship between data "channels" and media stream tracks
B1: Should the data "channel" be similar to a MediaStreamTrack, 
including the ability to be part of one or more MediaStreams,, be 
connected to consumer entities, be muted, and so on?

B2: If yes, should that similarity be documented by having the data 
"channel" API inherit from the MediaStreamTrack interface?


I think we've had discussion enough to call a consensus.

I call this:

- A1: YES, resoundingly. This needs to be documented as a design goal in 
the document.

- A2: NO, inheritance and specifying how to handle "the bits that don't 
make sense" is not the best use of our time. We should instead specify 
an independent interface, and state the compatibility goal.

- B1: NO, we have not found a compelling use case for this. So we will 
not pursue it.

- B2: This is irrelevant, given the conclusion of B1.

Thank you to all who contributed!

              Harald
Received on Sunday, 29 April 2012 14:25:37 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 29 April 2012 14:25:38 GMT