Re: [rtcweb] A plea for simplicity, marketability - and... who are we designing RTCWEB for?

[Harald Alvestrand <[e-mail]>]

On 10/21/2011 09:04 PM, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
> 2011/10/21 Randell Jesup<[e-mail]>:
>> This is the rough equivalent to saying "instead of exchanging email in a standard format, and letting people use whatever client/webmail-client they want to read it; if you want to read an email from a gmail user you should log into gmail using their interface; from an aol user log into AOL and their interface, etc.
> This is because SMTP is a successful protocol that exists from long
> time ago and allows each user to have a globaly reachable
> identificator (a mailto: URI).
Note (speaking as an emai veteran): These are 3 points (successful, 
existed for a long time, and allows a globally reachable ID). As of 
~1992, I don't believe that any of them were uncontroversial.
It took a lot of engineering work to get to where they were obvious truths.
>   Will RTCweb define an unique
> identificator for each user in the world? Not at all. RTCweb will be
> implemented by independent websites, so each website decides the
> identificator grammar of its users. Please don't try to make analogy
> between SMTP and RTCweb because it's not the same.
RTCWEB won't, but SIP and XMPP already have. If people deploy 
applications that implement SIP or XMPP on top of RTCWEB, one of them 
might eventually turn out to be "obvious" in the same way.

That's a hope of many, but far from the only use case for RTCWEB.