- From: Matthew Kaufman (SKYPE) <matthew.kaufman@skype.net>
- Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 19:53:12 +0000
- To: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>, "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
From: Harald Alvestrand [harald@alvestrand.no]
We're getting more and more code that depends on the API. We'd like to
make sure that we can allow that code to run, but preferably we'd want
to do that by adding polyfills instead of messing up the implementation.
Sorry. I'm pretty sure the specification isn't anywhere near final, and the fact that you've been selling it as nearly so and developers are creating "more and more code that depends on the API" really is your (Google's) problem and shouldn't be limiting the WGs ability to create the appropriate API here.
If you think adding an error callback for addIceCandidate is a complicated API change, just wait until the IETF actually takes up some of the work necessary for trickle ICE to even coexist with both existing ICE implementations and the SDP that describes existing ICE. I note that the first full IETF meeting in which MMUSIC has considered these proposals is still some months off.
Matthew Kaufman
Received on Sunday, 27 January 2013 19:54:03 UTC