Re: PR 258 (Add RTCRtpParameters.codec, RTCRtpCodecParameters, etc.)

Some comments on 258:
https://github.com/w3c/webrtc-pc/pull/258/files

+ <dt>unsigned short payloadType</td>


s/td/dt/

Also, in ORTC it is:


typedef octet payloadtype;



On Jul 24, 2015, at 15:02, Stefan H?kansson LK <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com<mailto:stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com>> wrote:

On 24/07/15 14:44, Peter Thatcher wrote:
Following the PR from https://github.com/w3c/webrtc-pc/pull/228, I have
changed RtpEncodingParameters.priority to an enum with very-low, low,
medium, and high.

This is kind of what we decided a long ago about priorities.  But I
forgot about it when I wrote the PR for RtpEncodingParameters.priority
and made it a double.  This is an update to that.


Do we still have consensus for using an enum for priority?  Look at the
PR to see how it looks.

Which PR is it? Priority seems to be part of #234 and #241.

Anyway, I have concerns with the part

          <dt>double priority</dt>
+          <dd>
+            <p>
+              Indicates the relative priority of this encoding, across
+              all RtpSenders of a given PeerConnection.  When there is
+              limited bandwidth available to a PeerConnection, higher
+              prioirty encodings will be sent with more bandwidth, and
+              lower priority encodings will be sent with less
+              bandwidth.

in combination with the upcoming "min" and "max" bitrate attributes. How
should he UA act if they conflict (e.g. a very high "min" and a low
priority)?

#228 only points at RTCWEB-TRANSPORT and I think that document only
talks about DSCP marking.

Stefan