- From: Alex Gouaillard <alex.gouaillard@temasys.com.sg>
- Date: Fri, 30 May 2014 00:23:48 +0800
- To: cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>
- Cc: Victor Pascual <victor.pascual.avila@gmail.com>, "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
even if they take another route (*cough*ortc*cough*). they need GUM. Plus, GUM is not part of webrtc spec, so they still don t support webrtc, technically. On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 12:18 AM, cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org> wrote: > I know. But how useful is gUM without WebRTC? They could have just > implemented their own API as they've done in the past. > > Gili > > > On 29/05/2014 12:15 PM, Victor Pascual wrote: >> >> This is just gUM >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >>> On May 29, 2014, at 6:08 PM, cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org> wrote: >>> >>> >>> http://developers.slashdot.org/story/14/05/29/1429254/next-ie-version-will-feature-web-audio-media-capture-es6-promises-and-http2 >>> >>> Is this an indication of things to come? >>> >>> Gili > >
Received on Thursday, 29 May 2014 16:24:19 UTC