Re: Google's position on the WebRTC API

On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 9:00 AM, Stefan Håkansson LK <
stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com> wrote:

> On 7/23/13 5:03 AM, Justin Uberti wrote:
> > With the compromise reached in the Unified Plan document,
>
> Presumably http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-roach-mmusic-unified-plan-00.txt


Yes. Sorry for not linking this before.

>
>
> > the group has
> > resolved one of the biggest remaining controversies for WebRTC, and
> > cleared the way for finishing up our current specs. Given the current
> > implementation state, we think it's important to complete these docs
> > within the next six months, reducing scope wherever possible to make
> > this happen. We can then refocus on what's next.
>
> Justin, thanks for clarifying your position.
>
> For clarity, the documents you mention, are they the W3C docs ("Media
> Capture and Streams" + "WebRTC 1.0"), the related IETF docs, or both?
>

I was referring to the W3C WebRTC 1.0 spec along with any IETF docs that it
depends on.

>
> Stefan
>
> >
> > Like other implementers, we've recognized that WebRTC has evolved
> > significantly since we started - the original goal of a very simple,
> > interoperable API has been joined by a desire for more direct, low-level
> > control. We see this as the impetus for a different approach, operating
> > a level lower than the current API. Such an API would be a fresh start
> > and address the concerns currently being discussed in this group, but
> > should also allow the current API to be layered on top of it.
> >
> > While the idea of starting this new work is exciting, just figuring out
> > what is in and out of scope will take a considerable amount of time.
> > That's why we propose scoping down and completing the current work now,
> > and then tackling our new challenge.
> >
> > Justin, for the Google WebRTC team
>
>