- From: cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>
- Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2013 13:32:24 -0400
- To: public-media-capture@w3.org
Harald,
On 17/07/2013 7:28 AM, Harald Alvestrand wrote:
> Thus, if your automated peer implements the protocols but not the
> APIs, it can do anything it wants with the incoming packets.
>
> Were you looking for a browser-based recorder or for a
> non-browser-based recorder?
I understand, but as mentioned in the previous thread I believe
there is a strong demand for headless (server) peers. I don't think it
is realistic (or beneficial) for the specification to ask every server
vendor to start parsing the signaling layer. By exposing Object APIs for
these use-cases we enable future specifications to modify implementation
details without applications out in the wild.
We need to differentiate between Implementers and Application
Developers. The latter should never have to interact with implementation
details because then future changes will break their applications.
Gili
Received on Wednesday, 17 July 2013 17:33:07 UTC