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

Re: Proposal: Different specifications for different target audiences

From: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2013 18:32:21 -0700
Message-ID: <CABcZeBOUEO12hNKma1vsssHzaQTbrQXqZL5FV+N7aLgcXEyY9w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com>
Cc: cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>, tim panton <thp@westhawk.co.uk>, "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 6:26 PM, Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com> wrote:

> On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 8:40 PM, Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> wrote:
>> Generally, we've talked about three kinds of APIs:
>> High-Level: Effectively SIP in the browser
>> Mid-Level: What we have now
>> Low-Level: Something in the vein of CU-RTC-Web
>> We've seen proposals for all of these and I think there was
>> rough consensus to do a mid-level API and in particular
>> JSEP (and incidentally not to do a low-level API). To my
>> knowledge, there has never been any kind of consensus
>> call not to do a Mid-Level API, and it would represent
>> a major shift in WG direction.
> I would see API more of the continuum then exact division between the
> three categories.

Sure. I'm just trying to reserve use of "high level" for something rather
far above
the current API.

Received on Monday, 22 July 2013 01:33:28 UTC

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