Re: [SPAM] RE: VS: Teleco Integrators vs Web Developers vs Browser Implementers

On 6 Jul 2013 07:18, "piranna@gmail.com" <piranna@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > The primary application is voice and video at least in my book
>
> I've always find this the most annoying point of WebRTC. Why so much
> focus on audio & video relegating DataChannels to a second place
> (almost a year to start having a specification and some
> implementations!). Would it be easier and simpler to implement the
> audio & video support directly over the DataChannels, maybe requiring
> them to be not reliable? Also, developing the API from this point of
> view it would be a really simple one. I think that focusing so much on
> audio & video and on media in general it's the reason the API is so
> much oriented to SDP and why people is so reluctant to develop a high
> level API.

I think this is very true. The DataChannel will in fact be the one thing
that will bring more innovation than anything else and treating it as
second class can only hurt our progress. The idea of thinking DataChannel
first before making decisions for audio and video seems like a good
strategy to make the APIs cleaner. At least for a second version of the
WebRTC API.

Silvia.