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

Re: Cisco's position on the WebRTC API

From: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 20:59:30 -0700
Message-ID: <CABcZeBNawHKEuMLpCa7Y9E=fFJYy4rmBg9Tm3C=_evOUO7R0ZQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>
Cc: "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 8:46 PM, cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org> wrote:

>  On 23/07/2013 11:21 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote:
> Both Firefox and Chrome are moving away from the use of any kind of prefix
> in their APIs:
>  http://www.chromium.org/blink#vendor-prefixes
> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/mozilla.dev.platform/itl6mtx2dxI/mbdPvbexB2EJ
>     Their new policy is acceptable too. My point is that Constraints,
> whether prefixed or unprefixed behind experimental flags, are both
> preferable to asking users to manipulate SDP. Is that something we can look
> at?

Totally. I think this is the right direction. I've started making a list in
my head of the
things that I don't think the current API can do that we need to add, but
if you
have your own list, you should definitely post it.

   Yes. I was on that call. Needless to say, I don't think Alex's writeup
> is at all unbiased
> as to what happened. It's particularly odd to see a complaint about "the
> little guy"
> given that the two major proponents of Futures were from Mozilla and Google
> (as were most of the major opponents). Indeed, Alex himself works for
> Google.
>     We need more frequent webrtc-public IRC meetings

I (and I suspect others) prefer con calls to IRC meetings. I don't think
this presents an undue
barrier to entry.

and more Web Developer representation (ideally unaffiliated with any
> business interest). A recurring theme I keep on bringing up is that we have
> an insufficient number of active Web Developers in the Working Group and
> official meetings. I've asked Stefan recently (I don't think he's had the
> chance to respond yet) and I'll ask you the same: what is the Working
> Group's plan to rectify this?

I'm not sure what you suggest we do. This is a volunteer effort and the list
is open to anyone. That said, this seems to me to be a fairly representative
WG in terms of non-company engagement when compared to the other
two W3C WGs I am involved in (WebAppSec and peripherally WebCrypto).

Both Google and Mozilla have mailing lists where there is active discussion
from Web Developers and I think the people from both organizations try to
take that feedback onboard. of course that feedback still gets filtered
through the representatives from those organizations, but there's nothing
stopping developers from posting directly here.

Received on Wednesday, 24 July 2013 04:00:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:17:50 UTC