Re: [rtcweb] Consensus Call: RTCWeb Terminology

Daryl Malas <D.Malas@cablelabs.com> Wed, 26 October 2011 21:33 UTC

Return-Path: <D.Malas@cablelabs.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 1B16421F8B34 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 Oct 2011 14:33:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -100.463
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-100.463 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_MODEMCABLE=0.768, HOST_EQ_MODEMCABLE=1.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TjCaQbP15uch for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 Oct 2011 14:33:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ondar.cablelabs.com (ondar.cablelabs.com [192.160.73.61]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89A4921F8AB0 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 26 Oct 2011 14:33:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from kyzyl.cablelabs.com (kyzyl [10.253.0.7]) by ondar.cablelabs.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id p9QLXK4l001552; Wed, 26 Oct 2011 15:33:21 -0600
Received: from srvxchg.cablelabs.com (10.5.0.15) by kyzyl.cablelabs.com (F-Secure/fsigk_smtp/303/kyzyl.cablelabs.com); Wed, 26 Oct 2011 15:33:20 -0700 (MST)
X-Virus-Status: clean(F-Secure/fsigk_smtp/303/kyzyl.cablelabs.com)
Received: from srvxchg.cablelabs.com ([10.5.0.15]) by srvxchg ([10.5.0.15]) with mapi; Wed, 26 Oct 2011 15:33:21 -0600
From: Daryl Malas <D.Malas@cablelabs.com>
To: Hadriel Kaplan <HKaplan@acmepacket.com>, "<igor.faynberg@alcatel-lucent.com>" <igor.faynberg@alcatel-lucent.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2011 15:33:20 -0600
Thread-Topic: [rtcweb] Consensus Call: RTCWeb Terminology
Thread-Index: AcyUJuIxjVRKWmFaQL62iJe6mhRyjA==
Message-ID: <CACDD896.80A5%d.malas@cablelabs.com>
In-Reply-To: <DDB18237-60B7-41B2-A57E-DD9E812E9B9A@acmepacket.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.13.0.110805
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Approved: ondar
Cc: "<rtcweb@ietf.org>" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Consensus Call: RTCWeb Terminology
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: Wed, 26 Oct 2011 21:33:28 -0000

I agree with Hadriel.  I think including all general WebRTC terminology in
the overview is the right thing to do.

--Daryl

On 10/26/11 2:11 PM, "Hadriel Kaplan" <HKaplan@acmepacket.com> wrote:

>
>On Oct 26, 2011, at 1:42 PM, Igor Faynberg wrote:
>
>> Having passed this milestone, maybe it is time to start a Terminology
>>RFC?
>
>I propose we do that in draft-ietf-rtcweb-overview, which already has a
>terminology section, but needs the new terminology added.
>I think people would naturally gravitate to reading an "Overview"
>document first, so having the terminology within it makes sense methinks.
>
>-hadriel
>
>_______________________________________________
>rtcweb mailing list
>rtcweb@ietf.org
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb