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

Re: Alternative to the offer/answer mechanism

From: cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 11:04:59 -0400
Message-ID: <51C31A1B.7090106@bbs.darktech.org>
To: public-webrtc@w3.org
On 20/06/2013 10:20 AM, Harald Alvestrand wrote:
> On 06/20/2013 03:30 PM, IƱaki Baz Castillo wrote:
>> 2013/6/20 Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>:
>>> You did notice that these interfaces have absolutely no idea what 
>>> DTLS is or
>>> what ICE is, right?
>>>
>>> There are just a *few* more libraries used to provide the whole set of
>>> functionalities.
>>> And:
>>>
>>> video_engine/include line count: 1695
>>> voice_engine/include line count: 2121
>>>
>>> You are not talking about small, simple, easily usable interfaces here.
>>
>> Right, but I expect that a JS API should not care about the C++ code
>> of the browser, that's why it is an API.
>
> This is not the C++ code. It's the *interface* to that C++ code.
> Interfaces to objects used by that interface are not included

     Just reminding you to please rename the subject-line to 
"Alternative to the offer/answer mechanism" since this is unrelated to 
the original subject "SDP wrapper? Object-oriented API?" does not apply.

     On that topic, isn't it reasonable to assume we could expose an 
alternative to offer/answer without going down to the low level found in 
the C++ classes you mentioned? Surely we should be able to come up with 
an intermediate-level interface that stands between offer/answer and 
low-level signaling?

Thank you,
Gili
Received on Thursday, 20 June 2013 15:05:46 UTC

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