Re: [rtcweb] Text communication in RTCWEB sessions

Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com> Tue, 13 November 2012 16:33 UTC

Return-Path: <adam@nostrum.com>
X-Original-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4851C21F8754 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 13 Nov 2012 08:33:59 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.762
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.762 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.062, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_44=0.6, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VgcbN8mh3nhA for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 13 Nov 2012 08:33:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from shaman.nostrum.com (nostrum-pt.tunnel.tserv2.fmt.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f03:267::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D392221F8718 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 13 Nov 2012 08:33:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from Orochi.local (99-152-144-32.lightspeed.dllstx.sbcglobal.net [99.152.144.32]) (authenticated bits=0) by shaman.nostrum.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id qADGXsYp087893 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 13 Nov 2012 10:33:54 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from adam@nostrum.com)
Message-ID: <50A27672.9050801@nostrum.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 10:33:54 -0600
From: Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121026 Thunderbird/16.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "\"Martin J. Dürst\"" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
References: <50A0BC04.6090200@omnitor.se> <50A0E85E.4020201@alvestrand.no><50A0EF72.8080309@omnitor.se> <50A0F340.3050809@ericsson.com> <E17CAD772E76C742B645BD4DC602CD8106F48831@NAHALD.us.int.genesyslab.com> <50A105D7.2000901@omnitor.se> <50A109F4.6010208@ericsson.com> <50A1171C.2020005@nostrum.com> <e43f6dc8-ad54-4a04-9e0a-9a29e44c7267@blur> <50A14CB9.8020706@nostrum.com> <50A1FD99.3030501@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
In-Reply-To: <50A1FD99.3030501@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Received-SPF: pass (nostrum.com: 99.152.144.32 is authenticated by a trusted mechanism)
Cc: rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Text communication in RTCWEB sessions
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers working group list <rtcweb.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb>
List-Post: <mailto:rtcweb@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 16:33:59 -0000

On 11/13/12 01:58, "Martin J. Dürst" wrote:
> On 2012/11/13 4:23, Adam Roach wrote:
>> On 11/12/12 09:43, Eric Burger wrote:
>>> Wild*ssed counter proposal: getting the signaling and API right with a
>>> codec that does not require too much codec-level negotiation,
>>> arguments about quality, or arguments about intellectual property,
>>> seems like an incredibly reasonable first step to delivering something
>>> that people can use, instead of writing books about.
>>
>> I look forward to the UTF-8 versus UTF-16 battle. :)
>
> The IETF is very strongly UTF-8. The W3C is very strongly UTF-8 on the 
> wire, but of course UTF-16 in JavaScript. So these battles are over.

Yeah, the smiley face was supposed to convey that the the comment was 
meant as tongue-in-cheek.

/a