Re: codec.name - some complications

2016-05-13 3:18 GMT+02:00 Bernard Aboba <Bernard.Aboba@microsoft.com>:
> For example, AFAIK the W3C does not define a kind corresponding to each MIME
> media type (e.g. there is no kind for “text”).

Isn't "text" a kind (similar to "audio"/"video" kinds)?


> So if an ORTC implementation
> were to support a capability for a MIME media type which has no
> corresponding kind, it is not clear that these capabilities could be
> retrieved by calling getCapabilities(kind).
>
> As an example, the IANA table has entries for “text/ulpfec”, “text/rtx” and
> “text/red” (note the different spelling!).
>
> So if an ORTC implementation were to support RFC 4103 (RTT), an application
> could call getCapabilities(“text”) in order to discover that the
> implementation supported “text/t140”.

How is problematic if getCapabilities(“text”) retrieves "t140"? It is
clear that that is about "text".


-- 
Iñaki Baz Castillo
<ibc@aliax.net>

Received on Sunday, 15 May 2016 20:50:38 UTC