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

Paul Kyzivat <> Mon, 22 August 2011 14:59 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE9F921F8B45 for <>; Mon, 22 Aug 2011 07:59:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.239
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.239 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.240, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_47=0.6]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZHnCek73qmO2 for <>; Mon, 22 Aug 2011 07:59:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F3D621F8B37 for <>; Mon, 22 Aug 2011 07:59:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ([]) by with comcast id PSu11h0071ZXKqc56T0C6L; Mon, 22 Aug 2011 15:00:12 +0000
Received: from Paul-Kyzivats-MacBook-Pro.local ([]) by with comcast id PT021h00L0tdiYw3hT08vK; Mon, 22 Aug 2011 15:00:11 +0000
Message-ID: <>
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2011 10:59:59 -0400
From: Paul Kyzivat <>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:5.0) Gecko/20110624 Thunderbird/5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
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: Mon, 22 Aug 2011 14:59:08 -0000

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.


On 8/22/11 10:42 AM, Elwell, John wrote:
> 4.2.xx Local Session Recording
> In this use case, the web application user wishes to record a real-time communication locally, such that transmitted and received audio, video or other real-time media are stored in one or more files. For a given medium, the two directions of transmission can be stored in the same file (mixed) or in separate files. The web application also stores metadata that gives context to the stored media.
> New requirements:
> Fxx1: The browser MUST be able to store transmitted and received media in local files.
> Axx1: The web application MUST be able to ask the browser to store transmitted and received media in local files, and in the case of audio at least, ask for the two directions of transmission to be stored mixed or separately.
> John
> John Elwell
> Tel: +44 1908 817801 (office and mobile)
> Email:
> 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.
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list