Pretty sure it is a complete sentence. Does this help?: I [myself] am not happy with the idea [as proposed here on the list] of having the correct API [one that discards offer/answer and hopefully also SDP] be deferred to 2.0 [as in not fixing it now, but waiting until a "2.0 specification" to have such an API that I would prefer], but requiring [implicitly, by having it become a W3C specification and then having customers demand conformance with the specification] browsers [like the one my company makes] to also [in that future state, where we have both the 1.0 and 2.0 specification] support the currently proposed 1.0 abomination [what we currently have as a W3C specification] [because there won't be any way to remove support for 1.0 when 2.0 is specified if sites are using the 1.0 APIs]. Matthew Kaufman ________________________________ From: Peter Thatcher [pthatcher@google.com] Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2013 8:06 AM To: Matthew Kaufman (SKYPE) Cc: Stefan Håkansson LK; public-webrtc@w3.org Subject: Re: Discussing new API proposals On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 7:52 AM, Matthew Kaufman (SKYPE) <matthew.kaufman@skype.net<mailto:matthew.kaufman@skype.net>> wrote: I am not happy with the idea of having the correct API be deferred to 2.0, but requiring browsers to also support the currently proposed 1.0 abomination. I think I know what you're trying to say here, but this doesn't appear to be a complete sentence. Perhaps it was longer and you deleted something while editing?
Received on Thursday, 18 July 2013 15:14:24 UTC