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

ACCEPTED Re: CHANGE: Drop mention of "WEBRTC effort" in Abstract, add ref to RTCWEB group

From: Stefan Håkansson LK <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 15:22:10 +0200
Message-ID: <4E9ECF02.3030205@ericsson.com>
To: public-webrtc@w3.org
The proposed changes are accepted,

the editors should update the document accordingly.


On 10/18/2011 02:40 PM, Francois Daoust wrote:
> Hi Adam, everyone,
> On 10/17/2011 06:42 PM, Adam Bergkvist wrote:
>> The editor team put up a new version of the editor draft at
>> http://dev.w3.org/2011/webrtc/editor/webrtc-20111017.html
> 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.
>> Changes:
> [...]
>> * Added abstract.
> 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.
> Thanks,
> Francois.
Received on Wednesday, 19 October 2011 13:22:36 UTC

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