- From: Michael Champion (MS OPEN TECH) <Michael.Champion@microsoft.com>
- Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2013 17:37:20 +0000
- To: Iņaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net>, public-orca <public-orca@w3.org>
Thanks for doing this! As I understand it, we're trying to build consensus on https://github.com/openpeer/ortc/blob/master/draft-w3c-ortc-api-00.md as a starting point for the community group API discussion and code experiments in the Github repo, correct? You're not asking "is this right in every detail" but instead "is this a publishable first draft, on which we can build experimental implementations and discuss how to incrementally improve the API?" By the way, we're going into a long holiday weekend in North America, so I would suggest keeping the informal poll open for a week or so. ________________________________________ From: Iņaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net> Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2013 1:04 AM To: public-orca Subject: Call for API consensus Hi all, Apart from some cosmetic details, AFAIK the current API [*] satisfies most of the demand (but I may be wrong). Of course there are still uncompleted fragments (some of them marked as "TODO" in the spec) and some missing stuff (for example the DataChannel definition, which IMHO will be really easy to adapt/integrate in ORTC, or the JS exception definitions). I would like to ask all of you to comment on separate mails about issues you may find in the current API, or about any improvement/change you may want to propose. As Erik described in a previous mail, first of all we need to get consensus in the API proposal, otherwise we have nothing :) Thanks a lot. [*] https://github.com/openpeer/ortc/blob/master/draft-w3c-ortc-api-00.md -- Iņaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net>
Received on Thursday, 29 August 2013 17:37:50 UTC