RE: Moving forward with SDP control

Last week, Stefan wrote:


"However, as outlined already last year, we think the WG should focus on
finalizing the current API draft (to a LC status) before starting a new
public/official document describing a new API. [...]

Discussing different use cases that are hard to do with the present API,
and discussing approaches and ideas that would make those use cases easier
to achieve, would probably be an excellent exercise in distilling out the
main approach for a new API (or future API extensions). We welcome such
discussions."


I interpreted that as "while finishing 1.0, gather requirements and uses
cases for 2.0".  But more recently, he wrote:


"And we have invited to a discussion on v2 of the API, but
proposed to start from use-cases. I don't think that is unreasonable,
but also hear that use-cases is not the right starting point.

If you have ideas or proposals (being API issues, API proposals,
procedures, use-cases, etc.), please submit them to the list (regardless
of if they are for v1, v2 or vN) - I'm pretty sure that good ideas will
be picked up. Perhaps someone has a really clever idea on a mod of the
current API that would be seen as an improvement by most?"


So, perhaps the discussion is more open than I thought.  Apparently you can
even start proposing ideas for 3.0 :).




On Jul 19, 2013 8:17 PM, "Matthew Kaufman (SKYPE)" <
matthew.kaufman@skype.net> wrote:

>  Who asked you to “wait until the current API is done” anyway?****
>
> ** **
>
> Matthew Kaufman****
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* Peter Thatcher [mailto:pthatcher@google.com]
> *…*****
>
> ** **
>
> It could be done either way:  put both in the API or build one API on top
> of the other in JS.   We could discuss which way is better, but we've been
> asked to wait until the current API is done before we discuss the
> particulars of 2.0.  But in general, I think we're in agreement, yes.  ***
> *
>
>  ****
>
> ** **
>