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

Re: SDP wrapper? Object-oriented API?

From: Ken Smith <smithkl42@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2013 17:07:42 -0700
Message-ID: <CACbRcArP-+FAazHYKZUJZ38YaX7xfnAg++DhxUivrv314N_jsQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net>
Cc: "piranna@gmail.com" <piranna@gmail.com>, public-webrtc <public-webrtc@w3.org>, cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>, "Suhas Nandakumar (snandaku)" <snandaku@cisco.com>
Well, at least *part* of the problem with SDP is its format. Even without
reading the docs, you can form some vague idea of what
peerConnection.createOffer() does. But without reading a whole bunch of
documentation, would you have the slightest idea what this meant?

o=- 1323097501 1323097509 IN IP4 o=- 1323097501 1323097509 IN IP4

For the record, I have no idea what it means. I'm just a standard
full-stack coder, not a VOIP expert. But in my opinion, the minute someone
who wants to use WebRTC has to start asking what that line means, it means
the folks designing the API have some more work to do. CSS positioning is a
nightmare, but it's a model of clarity compared to SDP.


On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 3:06 PM, Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net> wrote:

> 2013/6/16 piranna@gmail.com <piranna@gmail.com>:
> > somewhere need to figure out a better way of getting these systems to
> > interoperate without arbitrary edits to of opaque text files.
> >>
> > JSON to the rescue! :-D
> JSON is not the solution-for-all. The problem of SDP is not the
> format, but its monolithic exchange (if I modify something in my local
> streams I have to send you again an entire SDP, including ICE
> information). The same would happen in a JSON version of the SDP.
> Regards.
> --
> Iñaki Baz Castillo
> <ibc@aliax.net>


Ken Smith
Cell: 425-443-2359
Email: smithkl42@gmail.com
Blog: http://blog.wouldbetheologian.com/
Received on Monday, 17 June 2013 00:08:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:17:44 UTC