[rtcweb] WebRTC definition (Re: Consensus Call: RTCWeb Terminology)

Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> Wed, 26 October 2011 22:29 UTC

Return-Path: <harald@alvestrand.no>
X-Original-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 256D221F8B75 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 Oct 2011 15:29:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -108.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-108.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, J_BACKHAIR_27=1, J_CHICKENPOX_66=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4fnrTTFpuR+E for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 Oct 2011 15:29:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no (eikenes.alvestrand.no [158.38.152.233]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82B2611E8080 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 26 Oct 2011 15:29:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id D269339E106 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 27 Oct 2011 00:29:35 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at eikenes.alvestrand.no
Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (eikenes.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id aWDrtJ1yidmZ for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 27 Oct 2011 00:29:35 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [172.31.154.128] (unknown [72.14.229.81]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A9C8439E082 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 27 Oct 2011 00:29:34 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <4EA889CC.3090001@alvestrand.no>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2011 15:29:32 -0700
From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.23) Gecko/20110921 Thunderbird/3.1.15
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rtcweb@ietf.org
References: <AAB480AA-8F03-4C25-8A7C-55B88D057C24@acmepacket.com> <42322A10-14A7-4600-820D-7612A1B12592@cisco.com> <3747C7CB-C039-4D15-A46C-8FDB9A47AF3A@acmepacket.com> <DD0E14D2-252F-442B-9AFC-8ECD6704794B@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <DD0E14D2-252F-442B-9AFC-8ECD6704794B@cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [rtcweb] WebRTC definition (Re: Consensus Call: RTCWeb Terminology)
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers working group list <rtcweb.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb>
List-Post: <mailto:rtcweb@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2011 22:29:37 -0000

On 10/26/2011 10:17 AM, Cullen Jennings wrote:
> With my chair hat on ...
>
> I'd like to declare we currently have consensus for Hadriel's proposal that the technology should be referred to as "WebRTC" and the API as the "WebRTC API". The IETF WG name is still RTCWeb, the mailing list is still rtcweb@ietf.org, the IETF drafts should still have "-rtcweb-" in them to indicate the WG name.

As -overview editor, I'm happy to include this definition.

Just because I have to write it in a terminology list, I wonder how I 
should define it.

Is it an effort? A technology? A project?

It should be something like:

WebRTC
      A <something> that <someting> to enable peer to peer audio and 
video between browsers
     on the Internet.
     Components of WebRTC include a protocol profile, defined in the 
IETF, of which this document
     gives an overview, and an API, defined in the W3C, and specified in 
<reference>

Suggestions for the <something>s (or alternate formulations) would be 
most welcome.

                  Harald



> Cullen<RTCWeb CoChair>
>
>
> On Oct 24, 2011, at 10:56 AM, Hadriel Kaplan wrote:
>
>> For the API, the consensus was it would be confusing to people if we weren't consistent with W3C docs.
>>
>> So I propose the following:
>>
>> WebRTC: the whole shebang
>> WebRTC API: the JS<->Browser API.
>>
>> -hadriel
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> rtcweb@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>