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

Re: [ACTION-43] (sdp related objects and global namespace) - way forward

From: Anant Narayanan <anant@mozilla.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2012 13:08:50 -0700
Message-ID: <4FDF8AD2.5020002@mozilla.com>
To: Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com>
CC: "Cullen Jennings (fluffy)" <fluffy@cisco.com>, Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>, Adam Bergkvist <adam.bergkvist@ericsson.com>, Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org>, "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
On 6/18/12 12:27 PM, Justin Uberti wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 2:56 PM, Cullen Jennings (fluffy)
> <fluffy@cisco.com <mailto:fluffy@cisco.com>> wrote:
>
>
>     I'd be fine with prefixing everything with Rtc so it becomes
>
>     RtcPeerConnection
>
>     RtcSessionDescription
>
>     etc.
>
>     The key issues in my mind is that we get it so that it is very
>     unlikely we will have a conflict in the shared namespace
>
>
> Agree with this - there seems to be good precedent for using prefixes
> for this purpose.
>
> Of the prefixes proposed, I prefer either WebRTCXXXX or RTCXXXX over
> PeerXXXX or PeerConnectionXXXX.

Agreed, I think RTCPeerConnection, RTCSessionDescription, etc. are 
pretty reasonable. If people think "RTC.*" or "PeerConnection.*" is 
unacceptable, this works for me.

-Anant
Received on Monday, 18 June 2012 20:09:18 UTC

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