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

Re: Using tracks instead of streams

From: Cullen Jennings (fluffy) <fluffy@cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2013 22:39:45 +0000
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
CC: Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com>, Adam Bergkvist <adam.bergkvist@ericsson.com>, "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
Message-ID: <646DC3B8-247D-4D41-A7FD-E4B1506C7506@cisco.com>

I was imaging just one class that covered both sending and receiving. If we have both MediaStreamTrackSenders and MediaStreamTrackReceivers, what does it like for something that is sendrecv stream. Take the example of just a simple 2 way voice call for example. ( I'm not saying there is a problem here - I just want to see what it would look like as it's different that I was imagining )

On Nov 13, 2013, at 10:41 AM, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 12 November 2013 18:03, Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com> wrote:
>> I suggest we call the SendDoohickeys MediaStreamTrackSenders and the
>> corresponding receive-side objects MediaStreamTrackReceivers.
> I'm good with that.
> The rest is pretty good too.
> Except perhaps the simulcast thing, which I think still needs more
> thought.  The sender side is not where we should be focusing our
> attention, in my opinion.
Received on Wednesday, 13 November 2013 22:40:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:17:51 UTC