W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webrtc@w3.org > June 2015

RtpSender.getParameters and RtpSender.setParameters vs. RtpSender.param1, RtpSender.param2, ...

From: Peter Thatcher <pthatcher@google.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2015 15:57:12 -0700
Message-ID: <CAJrXDUHgG9AESidcCOMe=CCdFF4F8v6OoqdFUsNT6jdcGMTYdQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
Recently, I wrote up a PR reflecting what we (roughly) agreed up on at TPAC
2014: https://github.com/w3c/webrtc-pc/pull/234.

In it, I basically added this:

partial interface RtpSender {
  RtpParameters getParameters();
  void setParameters(RtpParameters parameters);
}

dictionary RtpParameters {
  // I actually proposed that we put these in an "RtpEncodingParameters",
  // But let's save that for another email thread.
  boolean active;
  double priority;
  // In the future: maybe bitrates, resolutions, framerate, fec, rtx,
codecs, header extensions, ...
}


But now there is an alternative idea:

partial interface RtpSender {
  boolean active;
  double priority;
  // In the future: maybe bitrates, resolutions, framerate, fec, rtx,
codecs, header extensions, ...
}


So the question for the list is:  which path do we go down?  It seems like
we're stuck until we get some consensus on one way or the other.
Received on Monday, 8 June 2015 22:58:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 15:19:44 UTC