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

Right, the current API is ill suited to support leading edge protocols. 
I 100% agree with you. That's why I'm proposing an alternative that 
allows for today's protocols but doesn't prohibit the future from 
happening too.

And even though I didn't bring up the topic because I explicitly try not 
to promote on these forums, Open Peer is "open". It's not official 
"standards track" via an official "standards body" but a open project 
like many other open projects. As a reminder, XMPP did not start out in 
the standards track either when it first came out. Not every standard 
has its origins being designed by a committee before being crowned a 
"standard".

-Robin


> Martin Steinmann <mailto:martin@ezuce.com>
> 5 July, 2013 1:40 PM
>
> >*From:*Robin Raymond [mailto:robin@hookflash.com]
> *>Sent:* Friday, July 05, 2013 1:25 PM
> *>To:* Martin Steinmann
> *>Cc:* 'public-webrtc_w3.org'
> *>Subject:* RE: VS: Teleco Integrators vs Web Developers vs Browser 
> Implementers
>
> >
>
> >
> >We already have an API that is very much disagreed upon by those of us 
> actually trying to use it now!
> >
> >-Robin
>
> ... meaning for those implementing P2P and other proprietary protocols 
> such as Open Peer.  It should not be about browser to browser, but 
> browser to any and a standardization process like this is ill-suited 
> to accommodate leading edge experiments with new protocols.
>
> --martin
>
>