Re: [rtcweb] RTCWeb default signaling protocol [was RE: About defining a signaling protocol for WebRTC (or not)]

[Matthew Kaufman <[e-mail]>]

On 9/19/2011 3:36 PM, Randell Jesup wrote:
>
> The purpose of including a protocol (which is optional to use) isn't 
> to allow
> direct browser-to-browser discovery or initiation without a server.  
> In fact,
> it doesn't help *or* hurt that use-case.  A primary reason for 
> including a protocol
> is to make it easy to build things.
>

By that logic we should have a built-in shopping cart to make creating 
web storefronts easier, a built-in email client to make it easier to 
build the next Gmail, etc.

Except that all the interesting things that have ever happened on the 
web are because clever people used the minimal built-in stuff to make 
something much more than the sum of its parts, not because the masses 
used the pre-built parts to replicate what already exists.

I don't want my web browser to have a phone inside of it. I want my web 
browser to be the thing that someone turns into the next great real-time 
communications experience... whatever that is.

Matthew Kaufman