Re: [rtcweb] Use Case draft

Stefan Hakansson LK <> Tue, 01 May 2012 05:06 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE7FF21F8762 for <>; Mon, 30 Apr 2012 22:06:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.249
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VZ8K5-CLIuhe for <>; Mon, 30 Apr 2012 22:06:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7210021F874A for <>; Mon, 30 Apr 2012 22:06:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb30-b7b07ae000006839-b7-4f9f6f4e670e
Received: from (Unknown_Domain []) (using TLS with cipher AES128-SHA (AES128-SHA/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id E5.ED.26681.E4F6F9F4; Tue, 1 May 2012 07:06:22 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [] ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server id; Tue, 1 May 2012 07:06:22 +0200
Message-ID: <>
Date: Tue, 01 May 2012 07:06:20 +0200
From: Stefan Hakansson LK <>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120410 Thunderbird/11.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <> <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA==
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Use Case draft
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers working group list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 01 May 2012 05:06:27 -0000

On 04/30/2012 11:00 PM, Randell Jesup wrote:
> On 4/30/2012 7:41 AM, Stefan Hakansson LK wrote:
>> On 04/27/2012 06:43 PM, Timothy B. Terriberry wrote:
>>> Ted Hardie wrote:
>>>> The chairs would like to ask the working group to focus on the use
>>>> case draft. If you have use cases that need to be added to the
>>>> document or text changes you'd like to suggest, please send them in
>>> I proposed the following use-case back in February, but there wasn't
>>> much discussion on actually adding it to the document:
>>> Let me know if the WG would like to proceed with something like this.
>> I think adding another small derivative of the simple video chat (this
>> one with peer-to-peer file transfer added) makes a lot of sense. For
>> one, we get a use case that requires reliable data (now we only have a
>> req for "short latency datagram" which sound like unreliable to me); in
>> addition we get a requirement for the data channel API to be able to use
>> blobs (as defined in the File API W3C rec) as input/output.
> The game case can need both reliable and unreliable data at the same
> time, which gets us reliable, unreliable and multiple streams.

You're right; but currently only game state updates is mentioned. 
Probably that use case should be updated.
>> A third good requirement that can be derived (if we want to) is the
>> ability to prioritize data in relation to audio/video.
> File transfer or "let me show you the photo I took" while talking would
> do I think.