On the way to WebRTC 1.0

Hi,

I thought a bit on how to best finalize WebRTC 1.0 in terms of specification work.
I believe we need to at least do two things:
1. Resolve all WebRTC 1.0 issues
2. Prove (to ourselves and others) that the WebRTC 1.0 spec is implementable in an interoperable manner

For 1, it might be a healthy exercise for the Working Group to label issues as "WebRTC 1.0” vs. “Post WebRTC 1.0”.
There will be a life after 1.0 so this is mostly a way to prioritize issues and focus more time in the short term on WebRTC 1.0 issues.
As an example, it would be interesting if the WG could decide whether https://github.com/w3c/webrtc-pc/issues/1742 <https://github.com/w3c/webrtc-pc/issues/1742> and https://github.com/w3c/webrtc-pc/issues/1727 <https://github.com/w3c/webrtc-pc/issues/1727> are in scope of WebRTC 1.0 or not.

For 2, analysis needs to be done on the whole spec to identify holes in our testing coverage.
I think this effort was done in the past (DrAlex?), maybe there is a need for refreshing it once again?
Since the spec will continue evolving, we might also want to take some explicit "test step" for any PR being made so that we can classify each change as:
- Editorial/No need for test
- Need for WPT test (and a link to the corresponding WPT test PR)
- Need for manual test/investigation or KITE test

At the end of the day, when we need to prove interoperability, we should be able to show:
- A WPT report showing that each WPT test is passing in at least two browsers (or we have explanations on particular failures).
- A manual report and/or KITE test report that shows interoperability between two browsers.
Given that we are targeting the WebRTC 1.0 spec, I would believe that WPT should be our topmost priority.

The current WPT report (https://wpt.fyi/results/webrtc?label=experimental <https://wpt.fyi/results/webrtc?label=experimental>) shows that we have some work in that area to either improve the tests, the implementations or the report.
Some reasons why the report is so red:
- Chrome is Plan B by default
- Safari does not expose host ICE candidates.
Reports gathered directly from browser CI might prove to be more green than from wpt.fyi.

Hope that helps,
 Y