Re: [rtcweb] Time allocation for video discussion (Re: Proposed Agenda For WG Meetings)

[Ted Hardie <[e-mail]>]

On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 7:54 AM, Matthew Kaufman (SKYPE)
<[e-mail]> wrote:
> I’m going to again object to having the video codec discussion in the IETF
> venue. The choice of mandatory video codecs within the browser context is a
> presentation-layer choice and highly related to a discussion that has
> already happened in the W3C context for video playback.
>
>
>
> Arguing that because the codecs produce bits and those bits go on the wire
> and then somehow that makes it an IETF issue is specious. The text of the
> JavaScript sent to the browser also goes “on the wire” and is also out of
> scope for the IETF.
>
>
>
> If the relevant browser vendors and other interested parties would like to
> have this discussion, it should happen within the W3C.
>
Hi Matthew,

Bullets 4 and 5 of the RTCWEB charter call out this work of this type
as in-scope, with codecs
mentioned specifically.  If working group participants are persuaded
by your argument, though, I point out
that the W3C has already sent a liaison statement on this topic
(http://datatracker.ietf.org/liaison/1215/).
If the working group wishes to be guided by the W3C on this topic, in
other words, it can use this liaison statement
as guidance.

regards,

Ted Hardie