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

[Randell Jesup <[e-mail]>]

On 10/21/2011 8:25 AM, Wolfgang Beck wrote:
> At the layer of call signaling messages are ultimately exchanged
> between two JS clients running on browsers. If we have different JS
> clients here, we need a standardized protocol between them. With
> trapezoid interconnection, we can hide this to some extent by doing
> protocol translations between JS client A / RTCWEB Server A and Server
> B / JS client B. Some
> information will get lost in translation.
>
> But as browsers can load JS on the fly,  user A could simply point her
> browser to Server B and use the same client as user B. Now all
> components at the signaling layer are provided by a single vendor and
> no standardized protocol is required. There is no loss of information
> as there are no protocol translators.

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.  Oh, and history, phonebooks, etc would 
all be separate."  Yes, it avoids standard 'federation' formats and 
conversions, but...


-- 
Randell Jesup
[e-mail]