W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webrtc@w3.org > December 2013

Re: Material (again!) for scoping discussion

From: Cullen Jennings (fluffy) <fluffy@cisco.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 16:01:36 +0000
To: Stefan Håkansson LK <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com>
CC: "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
Message-ID: <3B4C8B39-C5A7-4B32-B433-A33D29D9D98A@cisco.com>

This proposal is pretty biased to just be what Google wants, while ignoring input on the list. I think we need to start by discussing the processes for this.

I'm fine with the chairs might ask the question, see what was on the list, and make an aggregated list of topics to consider being in or out. I'm OK with the chairs trying to watch the list discussion and figure out what topics we can make progress on and sequences the order of the discussion.  I am not OK with the chairs building their own list or recomendations oriented toward's Google's needs and then then trying to stuff that decision through the WG.


On Dec 19, 2013, at 4:10 AM, Stefan Håkansson LK <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com> wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> we've now gone through the list of items that could be in/out of 1.0 of 
> WebRTC, and developed our opinion.
> 
> Clue for reading (most should be obvious): when there is a strange name 
> in the "Can be own spec?" column we propose creating a separate document 
> (with that working name).
> 
> Sorry for the very short notice, we'll talk more about this at the 
> telechat in a little less than five hours.
> 
> Stefan for the chairs
> <Chairs' proposal for WebRTC 1.0 In%2FOut - W3C (1).pdf>
Received on Thursday, 19 December 2013 16:02:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 15:19:37 UTC