Re: [rtcweb] Proposed text for local recording use case

"Elwell, John" <> Tue, 23 August 2011 07:49 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3257721F8B01 for <>; Tue, 23 Aug 2011 00:49:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.938
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.938 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.939, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_47=0.6, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Bi52vgv8OVWV for <>; Tue, 23 Aug 2011 00:49:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C6AA21F8A36 for <>; Tue, 23 Aug 2011 00:49:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from (unknown []) by (Server) with ESMTP id 12D121EB846C; Tue, 23 Aug 2011 09:50:24 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi; Tue, 23 Aug 2011 09:50:24 +0200
From: "Elwell, John" <>
To: Paul Kyzivat <>, "" <>
Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2011 09:50:22 +0200
Thread-Topic: [rtcweb] Proposed text for local recording use case
Thread-Index: Acxg3DlNdAOgF9mTSmOmuMEzCMGZbgAhgBiA
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Proposed text for local recording use case
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers working group list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2011 07:49:19 -0000


> -----Original Message-----
> From: 
> [] On Behalf Of Paul Kyzivat
> Sent: 22 August 2011 16:00
> To:
> Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Proposed text for local recording use case
> This is a good start. But I'd like to dig a little deeper into the 
> intent here.
> The below says the *user* wishes to record, and the *browser* must be 
> able to do it. But is that the only case of interest?
> ISTM that in a number of cases it will be the web application 
> that wants 
> the recording, even if there is an obligation to inform the 
> user that it 
> is happening. And the behavior of the application may be changed 
> substantially if the recording cannot be made.
> (Consider a web app provided by a brokerage to its clients.)
> OTOH, maybe some of these cases are out of scope because the 
> user+browser can't be sufficiently trusted, so that its 
> necessary to do 
> the recording from some secure server.
[JRE] I think there is a significant difference between local recording and remote recording. If there is a policy, say in a call centre, to record calls, the recording device is most likely going to be central, not local to the user's device. So I think for local recording it is largely up to the user whether to record or not. But yes, it could be that the application at least suggests recording.


John Elwell
Tel: +44 1908 817801 (office and mobile)

Siemens Enterprise Communications Limited.
Registered office: Brickhill Street, Willen Lake, Milton Keynes, MK15 0DJ.
Registered No: 5903714, England.

Siemens Enterprise Communications Limited is a Trademark Licensee of Siemens AG.