W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webrtc@w3.org > July 2013

Re: [SPAM] RE: VS: Teleco Integrators vs Web Developers vs Browser Implementers

From: <piranna@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Jul 2013 23:16:33 +0200
Message-ID: <CAKfGGh2PKggCR+65-SDiJxHO5jJr143zk0sv=A6cqXiqf8dR5w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Martin Steinmann <martin@ezuce.com>
Cc: tim panton <thp@westhawk.co.uk>, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, Parthasarathi R <partha@parthasarathi.co.in>, cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>, Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>, Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net>, Robin Raymond <robin@hookflash.com>, Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com>, Adam Bergkvist <adam.bergkvist@ericsson.com>, Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com>, "public-webrtc_w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>, Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
> The primary application is voice and video at least in my book

I've always find this the most annoying point of WebRTC. Why so much
focus on audio & video relegating DataChannels to a second place
(almost a year to start having a specification and some
implementations!). Would it be easier and simpler to implement the
audio & video support directly over the DataChannels, maybe requiring
them to be not reliable? Also, developing the API from this point of
view it would be a really simple one. I think that focusing so much on
audio & video and on media in general it's the reason the API is so
much oriented to SDP and why people is so reluctant to develop a high
level API.

"Si quieres viajar alrededor del mundo y ser invitado a hablar en un
monton de sitios diferentes, simplemente escribe un sistema operativo
– Linus Tordvals, creador del sistema operativo Linux
Received on Friday, 5 July 2013 21:17:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 15:19:34 UTC