- From: Jan-Ivar Bruaroey via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2024 21:53:42 +0000
- To: public-webrtc-logs@w3.org
> ... That way, in some wonderful future where one can construct RtpSender and RtpReceiver objects without SDP, you don't need RtpTransceivers to exist. I agree, so we should stop adding new methods to RtpTransceiver if we can avoid it. I favor SDP-agnostic options on `new RTCRtpScriptTransform` over the more SDP-specific `transceiver.addCodec`. Is it SDP-specific for JS to declare the input/output codec of the transform it performs? — Seems useful to the worker regardless of SDP. E.g. based on the transform-based part of what @alvestrand and I have been working on: ```js transceiver.sender.transform = new RTCRtpScriptTransform(worker, { inputCodecs: [{mimeType: "video/vp8"}], outputCodecs: [{mimeType: "video/custom-encrypted"}] }); transceiver.receiver.transform = new RTCRtpScriptTransform(worker, { inputCodecs: [{mimeType: "video/custom-encrypted"}], outputCodecs: [{mimeType: "video/vp8"}] }); ``` This nicely communicates the task to the (reused) worker (removing the need the invented `side` property in my [fiddle](https://jsfiddle.net/jib1/wb2c0hr1/)). -- GitHub Notification of comment by jan-ivar Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/webrtc-encoded-transform/pull/186#issuecomment-1881880905 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Monday, 8 January 2024 21:53:44 UTC