Re: [rtcweb] The MTI Codec Questions (what to ask and how to ask them)

[Rob Pickering <[e-mail]>]

On 05/11/2014 19:12, tim panton wrote:
> On 5 Nov 2014, at 15:47, Iñaki Baz Castillo <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>> 2014-11-04 18:01 GMT+01:00 tim panton <[e-mail]>:
>>> All implementations of the rtcweb specification must implement at least one of  VP8 or H.264,
>>> implementations that also implement the w3c’s webRTC javascript  API must implement  both VP8 and H264
>> +1
>>
>> This is obviously the only way-to-go and the only reasonable and
>> feasible decision.
>>
>> BTW and given that this is a W3C business, I would replace:
>>   "implementations that also implement the w3c’s webRTC javascript  API"
>> with:
>>   “browsers"
> Yes, that is the intention, but I think it is easier to get agreement on this clear, if clumsy, definition.
> If you want to come up with a good  definition of a browser, feel free :-)
> Me, I’m dodging that bullet!
+1 to the proposal and sane to dodge the bullet

Perhaps that should read "implementations that also *expose* the w3c's 
javascript API" otherwise there is an interesting case where a compiled 
mobile app isn't a "browser", but the same app using one of the JS app 
frameworks internally is. Externally they have essentially the same 
characteristics.

--
     Rob.