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

Re: SDP wrapper? Object-oriented API?

From: Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net>
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 16:51:19 +0200
Message-ID: <CALiegfnFiH=4OAXeY8p46mp2c+w0Xegkdf9ypkFgjva4etCbQw@mail.gmail.com>
To: piranna@gmail.com
Cc: cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>, Frédéric Luart <frederic.luart@apizee.com>, Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>, public-webrtc@w3.org
For that you will be able to use LOT of future WebRTC JS libraries coded by
experts (same as jQuery).

--
Iñaki Baz Castillo
<ibc@aliax.net>
El 19/06/2013 16:43, "piranna@gmail.com" <piranna@gmail.com> escribió:

> Maybe a stupid question, but there's no (technical) way to do the
> connection somewhat automatically without developers not needing to work
> with SDPs, but also don't worrying of offer/accept at all? This would be
> the best alternative...
> El 19/06/2013 16:36, "Iñaki Baz Castillo" <ibc@aliax.net> escribió:
>
>> Just this:
>> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb/current/msg07895.html
>>
>> --
>> Iñaki Baz Castillo
>> <ibc@aliax.net>
>> El 19/06/2013 16:35, "Iñaki Baz Castillo" <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>
>>> El 19/06/2013 16:33, "cowwoc" <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>
>>>> El 19/06/2013 16:11, "cowwoc" <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org> escribió:
>>>>
>>>>> On 19/06/2013 9:42 AM, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> 2013/6/19 cowwoc <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>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> With respect to
>>>>> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb/current/msg07895.htmlwhat does O/A stand for?
>>>>>
>>>>> Gili
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
Received on Wednesday, 19 June 2013 14:51:50 UTC

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