Re: [rtcweb] Microsoft tells W3C and IETF what we are doing no signs of offering real world interoperability

[Harald Alvestrand <[e-mail]>]

On 08/07/2012 11:57 AM, Tim Panton wrote:
> Ok, the timing is unfortunate, but can you honestly say that we didn't know that this was skype/microsofts opinion? We just chose to ignore it because it was inconvenient.
>
> Now that it is out there, are we seriously going to ignore a document with _those_ authors from a major browser maker and a team with extensive experience in the field jus because it is late!?!?
Speaking with WG chair hat on:

At the time of previous "what is the appropriate level" discussion, the 
WG chairs concluded that there was a rough WG consensus to stay with a 
higher-level API rather than trying to move the level of the API 
downwards towards a "low level API".

Since that time and until this week, there has been no specific proposal 
to be evaluated, and the main proponents of such an  API have been 
silent. Normal behaviour is to assume that a previous consensus 
declaration stands until there is new technical evidence to be 
evaluated, and proceed with further work on that basis.

So I can't agree that "because it was inconvenient" is an appropriate 
characterization.

               Harald