Re: On babies and bathwater (was Re: [rtcweb] Summary of Application Developers' opinions of the current WebRTC API and SDP as a control surface) from piranna@gmail.com on 2013-07-25 (public-webrtc@w3.org from July 2013)

From: <piranna@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2013 17:30:09 +0200
To: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
Cc: cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>, Stefan Håkansson LK <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com>, "Matthew Kaufman (SKYPE)" <matthew.kaufman@skype.net>, Peter Thatcher <pthatcher@google.com>, "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CAKfGGh1cEOkikSRFxn-gT6iEc31YQAKipQozjAT-Q0Rcuntc4A@mail.gmail.com>

> I don't see how this would produce a useful artifact. What would the browser
> emit to be inserted in signaling messages? It has to be something (at least
> in the current model).
>
You have objects whose data will need to be transfer, but instead of
be required to be done in a SDP blob, the format will be a decision of
the developer about what best fit for its application, being this SDP,
JSON, MessagePack or whatever (also custom ones). Also this would lead
to have an abstract API instead of one SDP oriented.


-- 
"Si quieres viajar alrededor del mundo y ser invitado a hablar en un
monton de sitios diferentes, simplemente escribe un sistema operativo
Unix."
– Linus Tordvals, creador del sistema operativo Linux

Received on Thursday, 25 July 2013 15:30:58 UTC