Re: Summary of "What is missing for building real services" thread

I guess Mozilla has their own native library/code base , so there are at
least two.

17/01/14 13:29 пользователь "Tim Panton new" <> написал:

>On 17 Jan 2014, at 06:53, cowwoc <> wrote:
>> On 17/01/2014 1:44 AM, Harald Alvestrand wrote:
>>> On 01/17/2014 05:55 AM, cowwoc wrote:
>>>> Hi Justin,
>>>> This isn't strictly tied to the spec, but I think it makes a lot of
>>>>sense to release a Native API at the same time as v1 that implements
>>>>the same functionality as the Javascript API.
>>> That's out of scope for the standardization activity, however.
>> Agreed.
>>> Exactly who do you think would be interested in releasing such a thing?
>> I'm not sure.
>> A related question is if someone comes along and does this legwork
>>(moving code from Chrome to the Native API), would Google consider
>>folding these changes into official Chrome releases... The benefit being
>>that this would simplify future WebRTC integration work for any future
>>browsers who want to jump on board (but are not necessarily based on
>> So in theory, this benefits both the browsers and authors of native
>> Gili
>I fully agree that a good native library would be great, however....
>From the standardization perspective this could be a bad thing. We are
>risking a mono culture here, where every WebRTC implementation comes from
>the same code base. I'm not keen on that. In the old days you needed 2
>independent implementation before you could claim a standard was workable.

Received on Friday, 17 January 2014 09:42:52 UTC