W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webrtc-logs@w3.org > January 2018

Re: [webrtc-pc] addTransceiver woes

From: stefan hakansson via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2018 13:15:16 +0000
To: public-webrtc-logs@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-355279206-1515071715-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
My personal summary of all this is:
- The spec is pretty OK as is
- `replaceTrack` to go from a non existing track to start sending is OK (given it can be done without re-negotiation, which it likely can in almost all cases)
- Maybe the term `send` is a bit vague, and we should update (but it seems clear to me that we can have sendrecv/sendonly/recvonly transceivers even though no RTP is being sent for the moment)
- The default direction of a transceiver coming from `addTransceiver` is currently "sendrecv". There may be reasons for changing it. Here we have different options, we could have another default that is always used (like "inactive"), or we could have it depend on whether the first argument to `addTransceiver` is a track ("sendrecv") or kind ("recvonly").
- The mid question was answered in https://github.com/w3c/webrtc-pc/issues/1662#issuecomment-346770769

What am I missing?

My personal favorite for default direction (if we decide we should change) is 'always set to "inactive"' since the app author would pretty immediately detect it does not work as intended and have to make a conscious choice. 

GitHub Notification of comment by stefhak
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/webrtc-pc/issues/1662#issuecomment-355279206 using your GitHub account
Received on Thursday, 4 January 2018 13:15:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 6 May 2023 21:19:43 UTC