Re: JSEP API changes - choosing a path forward

Adam and I have been talking about how we can do just that. With IETF going
on this week, I think it would be good to have a bit more time to see if we
can figure out a path here and not force the WG to choose.

On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 8:54 AM, Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com> wrote:

>
> I'd like to discuss this topic at the next phone call - I don't think the
> issue is choosing one. I think the issue is discussing what we like about
> both and seeing if we can find a way to have our cake and eat it too.
>
>
> On Mar 20, 2012, at 17:15 , Harald Alvestrand wrote:
>
> > List,
> >
> > we now have two member contributions suggesting changes to the
> PeerConnection API in order to align with the JSEP direction suggested in
> the IETF:
> >
> > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webrtc/2012Mar/0049.html(from Adam)
> > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webrtc/2012Mar/0064.html(from Cullen)
> >
> > In order to make quick progress, the chairs aim to call for the
> incorporation of one of these in the core document as soon as consensus is
> detected in the WG; if it's not obvious before what the
> > consensus is, the chairs aim to make a call one way or the other based
> on the list traffic up to ca March 30 (this is just after the IETF meeting,
> so people taking the opportunity for face-to-face discussion can report on
> those discussions here).
> >
> > All list members who have reviewed both documents are encouraged to
> > state their opinion on the list.
> >
> >                   Harald and Stefan
> >
>
>
>