- From: Philipp Hancke via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2017 07:48:55 +0000
- To: public-webrtc-logs@w3.org
> but in answers and subsequent offers, they are assigned to "appropriate" in SRD already, [see here](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-rtcweb-jsep-20#section-5.6) (`according to the canonical order described in Section 5.2.1` which essentially media-section order from the remote side mixed with the local side processed in create-time order) If an implementation were to choose media-section order, adding a video track, then an audio track and setting a remote description which is a-v changes the order. Lexical ordering by mid... will probably be the same as ordering a MST track set by id, consistent but unpredictable. > Any ordering requirement constrains implementation. I'd say they are already constrained by JSEP requirements but can see an argument that JSEP does not define getTransceivers() and therefore does not expose its ordering. > So I would only want to impose ordering if it is a) well-defined for all cases and b) useful. (c) consistent. addition order does not change even though developers should be *strongly* encouraged to always use .forEach(), .find() and .map() on the result of getTransceivers() et al instead of making assumptions. -- GitHub Notification of comment by fippo Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/webrtc-pc/issues/1669#issuecomment-346269426 using your GitHub account
Received on Wednesday, 22 November 2017 07:49:02 UTC