Re: [rtcweb] API draft: draft-kaplan-rtcweb-api-reqs-00

[Iñaki Baz Castillo <[e-mail]>]

2011/10/21 Dan Burnett <[e-mail]>:
> And speaking as an editor in the W3C group to which you are referring, the point here is that protocol discussions are leading API discussions, and both are happening in the RTCWeb group, when the API discussions should all be happening in the W3C WebRTC group.  But, since JS API discussions are happening here, we now have a "no-signaling" draft in the IETF that lists requirements on the WebRTC API, *because the chairs asked for it*.

Hi Dan, I understand your point but please consider that this WG has
been involved in a discussion about the scope of such WebRTC API. It's
still unclear/undefined whether such API must only deal with media
aspects of the RTCweb stack in the browser, or whether it must also
deal with external signaling (in-the-wire).

Honestly I think that current works and proposals are helping a lot
for us to understand the whole picture. However I don't think that
this WG is attempting to define such API (which is a task of W3C) but
just to define its scope.

Regards.


-- 
Iñaki Baz Castillo
<[e-mail]>