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

Re: VS: Teleco Integrators vs Web Developers vs Browser Implementers

From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Jul 2013 09:25:16 -0700
Message-ID: <CABkgnnVX9D0De5Cf4SfbjmLcMPpZmsNjTm0-m3=hCe7QiVVVAA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Parthasarathi R <partha@parthasarathi.co.in>
Cc: cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>, Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>, Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net>, Robin Raymond <robin@hookflash.com>, Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com>, Adam Bergkvist <adam.bergkvist@ericsson.com>, Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com>, "piranna_gmail.com" <piranna@gmail.com>, "public-webrtc_w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>, Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
On 3 July 2013 12:03, Parthasarathi R <partha@parthasarathi.co.in> wrote:
> 1)      Multiple signaling protocol has to be supported like Jingle, SIP

This is false.  A non-SDP API makes it significantly easier to support
non-SDP protocols.

If you were to make the case that ONLY Jingle and SIP were intended to
be supported, then that it would be true that an SDP API would make it
easier to support those protocols.  However, it's clearly not the case
that only Jingle and SIP are being used (the complete opposite in
fact).

> 2)      Develop WebRTC application with few lines of code.
>
> a.       This is not possible with API based approach

This is also demonstrably false.
Received on Friday, 5 July 2013 16:25:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 15:19:34 UTC