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

Re: Proposal: Different specifications for different target audiences

From: tim panton <thp@westhawk.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2013 23:07:59 +0100
Cc: "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
Message-Id: <F1F7BFB1-51EE-48AA-94D4-7DB16FD0A22F@westhawk.co.uk>
To: cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>

On 19 Jul 2013, at 19:08, cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org> wrote:

> On 19/07/2013 1:14 PM, tim panton wrote:
>> On 19 Jul 2013, at 17:16, cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org> wrote:
>>> The APIs should be driven by use-cases and developed from the top-down.
>> I didn't like that mechanism 18 months ago, and I'm not keen on it now - 
>> There was a long list of use cases produced at the time,
>> almost none of which describe what people are actually doing with the current webRTC
>> implementations. 
>> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb/current/msg02491.html
>> T.
> Tim,
>     The kind of use-cases you were asking for could only have come from Web Developers, not Browser Vendors or Integrators.

To be clear - I wasn't asking for use-cases - I was being asked for them. 
My reply then, as now,  is that we just don't know how webRTC will be used in the (near) future.
Any design process that starts off by assuming we know the definitive set of use cases is doomed.


>     When you asked this question 18 months ago, virtually no Web Developers were looking at WebRTC. Times have changed.

True. But I still think we are only scratching the surface of what we can do with webRTC. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGw8n9Il4KI gives you a sense of how much more change we should expect.


> Gili

Received on Sunday, 21 July 2013 22:08:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:17:49 UTC