Re: [rtcweb] Video codecs: Clear positions....

[cowwoc <[e-mail]>]

On 09/12/2014 12:45 PM, Sergio Garcia Murillo wrote:
> On 09/12/2014 18:36, cowwoc wrote:
>> On 09/12/2014 12:32 PM, David Singer wrote:
>>>
>>> I would also like to know from those confirming the sense of the 
>>> room, whether THEY THEMSELVES intend to implement both codecs, or 
>>> whether they conveniently think they don’t need to, and it’s just a 
>>> problem for other people to handle.
>>>
>>> Honestly, a +1 for “those other people should do it” is meaningless.
>>
>> That's a fair point. I'm guessing the vast majority of people 
>> answering on the mailing list only plan to implement one codec 
>> because they are non-browser implementors.
>
> No, that's not a fair point. I don't see most of the people making 
> taking decisions on other topics (SDP, FEC,  DTLS, CC, 
> SVC/Simulcasting/Multicasting, Plan A/PlanB/No plan) implementing them 
> themselves. So if this going to be the rule about who-can-vote-what we 
> should redefine the whole IETF process.
>
> Everyone should be aware of what are they voting and what is the 
> amount of burden/costs it requires to be implemented, and see how that 
> will contribute to the success/failure of webrtc and vote accordingly. 
> Not just in this topic, but in any topic.

Sergio,

I think this warrants a discussion. It might not be very politically 
correct to say so, but I support the idea that only those who are 
implicated should have a say. The alternative leads to armchair politics 
and bikeshedding.

That said, I echo Simon's point that until Apple and Microsoft 
officially declare their intent to implement WebRTC they are not 
"implicated", hence they should not really get to vote. Sorry guys :)

Gili