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

Re: SDP wrapper? Object-oriented API?

From: cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 10:45:09 -0400
Message-ID: <51C1C3F5.9010101@bbs.darktech.org>
To: Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net>
CC: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>, public-webrtc@w3.org, piranna@gmail.com, Frédéric Luart <frederic.luart@apizee.com>

     Disregarding the whole section about replacing Offer/Answer since I 
believe it is out of scope for this discussion, are you asking for a 
Javascript API that interacts directly with WebRTC without having to 
pass through a blob/opaque-token? I agree the latter is not ideal, but 
at the end of the day what's the big deal? If vendors want SDP and 
end-users want a Javascript API, agreeing to a blob is a decent compromise.

Gili

On 19/06/2013 10:36 AM, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
>
> Just this: 
> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb/current/msg07895.html
>
> --
> Iñaki Baz Castillo
> <ibc@aliax.net <mailto:ibc@aliax.net>>
>
> El 19/06/2013 16:35, "Iñaki Baz Castillo" <ibc@aliax.net 
> <mailto:ibc@aliax.net>> escribió:
>
>     Please re-read again. Nobody in that thread is requesting an API
>     for managing an opaque string. ;)
>
>     --
>     Iñaki Baz Castillo
>     <ibc@aliax.net <mailto:ibc@aliax.net>>
>
>     El 19/06/2013 16:33, "cowwoc" <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org
>     <mailto:cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>> escribió:
>
>
>             So having read most of this discussion I'm a bit puzzled.
>         Aren't we proposing the same thing? I believe we're both
>         saying that vendors should be free to use whatever format they
>         want under the hood (SDP or otherwise) but that users should
>         be given a Javascript API for querying and manipulating this
>         opaque token. Did I misunderstand?
>
>         Gili
>
>         On 19/06/2013 10:12 AM, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
>>
>>         Offer / Answer.
>>
>>         --
>>         Iñaki Baz Castillo
>>         <ibc@aliax.net <mailto:ibc@aliax.net>>
>>
>>         El 19/06/2013 16:11, "cowwoc" <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org
>>         <mailto:cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>> escribió:
>>
>>             On 19/06/2013 9:42 AM, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
>>
>>                 2013/6/19 cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org
>>                 <mailto:cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>>:
>>
>>                         Honestly, I think this is the wrong
>>                         approach/workaround.
>>
>>
>>                          What do you propose instead?
>>
>>
>>                 This:
>>
>>                 http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb/current/msg07880.html
>>
>>                 http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb/current/msg07895.html
>>
>>                 http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb/current/msg07896.html
>>
>>                 http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb/current/msg07899.html
>>
>>
>>                 --
>>                 Iñaki Baz Castillo
>>                 <ibc@aliax.net <mailto:ibc@aliax.net>>
>>
>>             Hi,
>>
>>             With respect to
>>             http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb/current/msg07895.html
>>             what does O/A stand for?
>>
>>             Gili
>>
>
Received on Wednesday, 19 June 2013 14:45:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 15:19:33 UTC