[rtcweb] Usecases for innovation.

Tim Panton <tim@phonefromhere.com> Tue, 01 November 2011 08:30 UTC

Return-Path: <tim@phonefromhere.com>
X-Original-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6607521F8E74 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 1 Nov 2011 01:30:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.98
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.98 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CsC1dz2qV1Lc for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 1 Nov 2011 01:30:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from zimbra.westhawk.co.uk (zimbra.westhawk.co.uk []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8FA121F8E6B for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 1 Nov 2011 01:30:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [] (unknown []) by zimbra.westhawk.co.uk (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE7AD37A902; Tue, 1 Nov 2011 08:43:10 +0000 (GMT)
From: Tim Panton <tim@phonefromhere.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 08:30:21 +0000
To: rtcweb@ietf.org
Message-Id: <084BA945-E5AB-480D-8608-1340E8C8125F@phonefromhere.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1251.1)
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1251.1)
Subject: [rtcweb] Usecases for innovation.
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers working group list <rtcweb.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb>
List-Post: <mailto:rtcweb@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2011 08:30:42 -0000

I've repeatedly been asked for use-cases for innovative applications of webRTC
to justify my contention that we should be providing a low-level framework,
not an embedded legacy compatibility application.

It's a 'when did you stop beating your wife?' question, there is no good answer.
By definition we don't know what innovative uses are yet, so we are reduced to
guessing, which sounds unconvincing.

By chance, this weekend I was exposed to 2 innovative uses of real-time-communications
in a browser that _won't_ fit in the current looking-over-its-shoulder scheme.

1) H264 implementation in Javascript http://yfrog.com/nmng0z 
2) Kinect as an input device for a virtual receptionist in a real reception area
	(Voxeo's as it happens).

Neither of these are production ready - or indeed necessarily a good idea,
but the fact that neither (minor) innovation fits at all into our brand new framework
should give us pause for thought. (but given the pell-mell dash to be compatible
with last century's deskphones I don't imagine it will).