- From: Matthew Kaufman (SKYPE) <matthew.kaufman@skype.net>
- Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2013 19:02:18 +0000
- To: "Matthew Kaufman (SKYPE)" <matthew.kaufman@skype.net>, Stefan Håkansson LK <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com>, Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com>
- CC: "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
Sorry, I am reminded that in fact we tried this *last August*, not in January, making the failure to make significant progress in the current direction even more ridiculous. Matthew Kaufman > -----Original Message----- > From: Matthew Kaufman (SKYPE) [mailto:matthew.kaufman@skype.net] > Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 11:42 AM > To: Stefan Håkansson LK; Roman Shpount > Cc: public-webrtc@w3.org > Subject: RE: Discussing new API proposals > > From: Stefan Håkansson LK [mailto:stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com] > > > > The current approach for 1.0 is to use SDP, but if someone contributes > > a > > (detailed) proposal that takes us faster to the goal of a stable spec, > > maintains functionality and still would be possible to translate > > to/from SDP, then I think people would listen. > > We did that, in January. > > I still maintain that it would take us faster to the goal of a stable spec, would > have at least as much functionality, and we can show that it is easily > translatable to/from SDP (easier than using what comes out of JSEP-based > browsers, even). (What we can't show is how to translate it to the SDP that > comes out of the current JSEP-based browsers, however, as we don't have a > specification sufficient to know what that is nor can we look at the source > code to work it out that way) > > I thought people would listen too, but I was proven wrong, so here we are. > > Matthew Kaufman > >
Received on Wednesday, 17 July 2013 19:03:25 UTC