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

Re: Recap from WebRTC World

From: cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 12:24:16 -0400
Message-ID: <51EFFFB0.5050009@bbs.darktech.org>
To: "Cullen Jennings (fluffy)" <fluffy@cisco.com>
CC: "<public-webrtc@w3.org>" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
On 24/07/2013 3:03 AM, Cullen Jennings (fluffy) wrote:
>> 	 How do we address the fact that the WG does not represent web developers? (I believe we are in the middle of having this discussion)
> I suspect we are closer to the end of the discution than the middle of this discussion.
>
> Let start at a high level. I and many other people here doubly believe in the principles of http://open-stand.org/principles/ and more importantly W3C and IETF believe in that. One of the key principles is balance, which is around inclusiveness. W3C allows anyone to become members of a WG (part of the "open" in "open-stand"). Decisions are made by the members, some who are developers and some who are not. Practically this means that decisions about this API are getting made by some people that are developers and some that are not. The W3C thinks that is a good thing. So do I - I like diversity it all it's forms.

     I did not mean to imply that only developers should sit on the WG. 
Of the developers, I'm advocating a diversity of developer types.

> Of other importance, it would be an anti trust issue if we decided that all members were equal but web developer members were more equal than others.

     I'm asking for equal representation, not more than equal.

> A change of this type would require fundamental process changes at W3C. Theses process changes could not be done inside this WG.
>
> The other issue is what you think a web developer is. I suspect that you think of me as a telco but consider for a moment that I deal with thorny web issues for a very large group of web developers that build webex which is what some analyst consider the #2 cloud provider (behind salesforce.com). Not sure I see it as the #2 but any way you look at it, webex has a lot of web developers working on it and needs to deal with all of the long term hard web developer problems. I think the more you look at it, you will find it hard to decide who is a web developer, who is implementing browsers, and who is a telco. I don't tend to use theses types of distinctions between people. Obviously google has some pretty talented people around web development and web API design. Thinking they don't know how to do this just because they also produce a browser would be a bad assumption.

     When I first mentioned "Web Developers" a few months ago I wrote: 
"Web Developers without telecom experience". I hope this clarifies the 
type of developers I am asking for.

>> 	 Troubleshooting WebRTC: There is a gaping hope when it comes to user-facing diagnostic tools.
> I think most people following this works know we intent to add more to the stats API. If you want to improve this, I would suggest looking at metrics that are already defined for RTCP and RTCP-XR and pick which ones you need to solve this then come up with a concreted propel for adding theses to the stats API including why they are the right set.
>
> I was nearly in tear of laughter as you explained to EKR how Skype works. I don't know if you know but Eric was one of the most senior engineers at Skype. I wonder if he qualifies as a web developer - there is code he wrote in Skype, Facebook, WebEx, Chrome, Firefox, as well as many web servers.

     No, he does not (for the reasons mentioned above).

Gili
Received on Wednesday, 24 July 2013 16:25:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 15:19:35 UTC