W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webrtc@w3.org > July 2012

Re: Summary of some ongoing discussions

From: Stefan Hakansson LK <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 10:20:01 +0200
Message-ID: <5003CEB1.8030309@ericsson.com>
To: Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com>
CC: "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
On 07/13/2012 06:02 AM, Justin Uberti wrote:
> Thanks for summarizing this. This matches my understanding, and as I see
> it the main thing we need to resolve to get a stable v1 spec is whether
> SessionDescription and IceCandidate should be dictionaries or objects.

That is one thing (and I don't think what we decide is that important 
actually - we need to make a decision though); another is 
constraints/options related to MediaStreamTracks, a third (this is more 
general) is error handling

>
>
> On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 5:18 AM, Stefan Hakansson LK
> <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com
> <mailto:stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com>> wrote:
>
>     Here is an attempt from the chairs to summarize the status of
>     several on-going discussions:
>
>
>     Renaming to avoid namespace issues (Anant) [ACTION-43]
>          No appetite for creative solutions like container interfaces.
>          Observation that others drop many names in the global namespace.
>          Rough consensus around a prefix for types (most likely RTC or Rtc).
>
>
>     Async callbacks for SetLocal/SetRemote calls (Justin)
>          Initially this seems to be acceptable. Code that doesn’t set
>     them will still work.
>          Mainly for error handling purposes - perhaps a more elegant
>     solution can be found
>
>
>     New state names and explicit state diagram for State / IceState
>          New names and diagrams seem acceptable
>
>
>     Constraints -> option dictionaries for Create*/Set*
>          Discussion shows a need for both optionality and ordering -
>     every complexity that led to constraints also applies here.
>          We should keep them as constraints structures.
>          We should update the registration doc to say that it needs to
>     specify which API calls they make sense in.
>
>
>     Constraints/options for addStream/addTrack
>          Some options are more related to MediaStream/MediaStreamTracks,
>     than to session
>          Need to be defined
>
>
>     Format of SessionDescriptions and Ice candidates
>          These are currently objects
>          There has been a proposal to move them to dictionaries instead
>          No consensus yet
>
>     Adding a DataChannel object [ACTION-49]
>          Proposal written up by Randell
>          Not clear what the benefits of introducing it is
>
>     Comments/feedback most welcome!
>
>     Stefan for the chairs
>
>
Received on Monday, 16 July 2012 08:20:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 15:19:28 UTC