W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webrtc@w3.org > October 2011

RE: CHANGE: Drop mention of "WEBRTC effort" in Abstract, add ref to RTCWEB group (was: Re: Update 20111017 to Editor draft)

From: Adam Bergkvist <adam.bergkvist@ericsson.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 11:13:58 +0200
To: Francois Daoust <fd@w3.org>
CC: "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
Message-ID: <A1249B08688639468D1CB181445EE79D42C9DC8C0D@ESESSCMS0355.eemea.ericsson.se>
On 18 oktober 2011 14:41, Francois Daoust wrote:
 
> Thanks. Note a minor typo: in the header section, there is a
> missing "</a>" at the end of the link to the previous version
> that makes the link span over the list of editors.

Noted. Thanks.

> The term "WEBRTC effort" is undefined. I take it to mean the
> combination of WebRTC and RTCWEB groups, but this is not
> self-evident. Harald defines the "RTCWEB/WEBRTC effort" in
> section 2.2 of the Overview draft:
>   http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-rtcweb-overview-02#section-2.2
> ... but the abstract should read without requiring external reading.
> 
> I propose two editorial changes to clarify:
> 
> 1. I think the abstract is more to describe the specification
> than the underlying effort in any case, so I propose to drop
> the first sentence, and reformulate a bit the second sentence as:
> "This document defines a set of APIs that allow local media,
> including audio and video, to be requested from a platform,
> media to be sent over the network to another browser or
> device implementing the appropriate set of real-time
> protocols, and media received from another browser or device
> to be processed and displayed locally."
> 
> 
> 2. I would then make an explicit reference to the IETF RTCWEB
> group at the end of the "Introduction" section with something like:
> "This specification is being developed in conjunction with a
> protocol specification developed by the IETF RTCWEB group [RTCWEB]."
> 
> I think the abstract should be updated before publication as
> first public working draft because that's the first (and
> sometimes only!) thing people will see.

Your proposed changes look like improvements to me.

/Adam
Received on Wednesday, 19 October 2011 09:14:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 15:19:25 UTC