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

Re: On babies and bathwater (was Re: [rtcweb] Summary of Application Developers' opinions of the current WebRTC API and SDP as a control surface)

From: Stefan Håkansson LK <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2013 07:51:40 +0000
To: Rob Manson <roBman@mob-labs.com>
CC: "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
Message-ID: <1447FA0C20ED5147A1AA0EF02890A64B1C32FAD0@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se>
On 7/21/13 8:28 AM, Rob Manson wrote:
> Thanks Stefan.
>
> Yep...will do.

I can see your input now, thanks!

>
> roBman
>
>
> On 21/07/13 15:46, Stefan Håkansson LK wrote:
>> Rob,
>>
>> Peter T has a spreadsheet at
>> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AuaKXw3SkHMSdHlZdV9RN0xSWFhybVl4anJLRkVPV0E#gid=1
>> collecting the experiences made when using the WebRTC APIs. Could you
>> enter what you have learned? The more people that contribute the better.
>>
>> Stefan
>>
>> On 7/21/13 1:08 AM, Rob Manson wrote:
>>> +1
>>>
>>> As a web developer that's spent a lot of time experimenting with the
>>> currently specified version of the WebRTC related APIs and that's been
>>> following the mailing list debates closely this really does seem like
>>> the best resolution.
>>>
>>> It provides a more extensible and flexible architecture that can evolve
>>> at "web developer speed" not "aligned browser release speed". And at
>>> this speed it will also be less fragile.
>>>
>>> It provides a clear separation of concerns so people can use SDP where
>>> they want, but not everyone is restricted by the timelines of other WGs
>>> that are required to evolve SDP.
>>>
>>> And it would enable even more experimentation and future facing
>>> development too.
>>>
>>>
>>> Also, in terms of timing I think getting this right is more important
>>> than the current commitment to a deadline.
>>>
>>> This is from the perspective of a web developer that has gone to all the
>>> effort of just finishing a book on "Getting started with WebRTC" using
>>> the existing API and who is also working on several commercial projects
>>> based on the current API.
>>>
>>> So if anyone should be promoting "just get the first version out" then
>>> it should be someone in my position. But I think you really will find
>>> that most web developers would rather we got this abstraction right
>>> first so we can avoid all of the extra support issues and application
>>> re-work that will be required down the track if we don't.
>>>
>>> roBman
>>>
>>>
>>> On 20/07/13 23:51, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
>>>> Let W3C experts to define a good JS API for WebRTC (with no SDP), let
>>>> MMUSIC WG to define a SDP format for WebRTC, and then let JavaScript SIP
>>>> experts to build JS libraries on top of it to play the SDP game, and we
>>>> all will be happy. And telcos will be much more happy than they think.
>>>> Let's get rid of all the SDP O/A stuff in the browser. The browser is
>>>> not a phone and "fixed logic + fixed code" does not work here.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
Received on Sunday, 21 July 2013 07:52:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 15:19:35 UTC