[RTW] [dispatch] The charter formerly know as RTC-WEB take 3

[Peter Musgrave]

Yeah. (sigh)

I do agree a common standard is necessary and perhaps the buck does have to stop with us. 

I do not oppose including this in the charter. I do think we need to segregate this codec recommendation from the plumbing - so those docs can blast ahead as the debate on CODECs rages. Would we contemplate a WEBCODEC group separate from rtcweb since these are activities with very different participants and goals?

Regards

Peter Musgrave

On 2011-01-18, at 9:27 AM, Adam Roach wrote:

> On 1/18/11 07:43, Jan 18, Peter Musgrave wrote:
>> I share the concern expressed by many on the list that including selection of baseline CODECs (audio and video) is something which will consume enormous energy and FWIW I don't see it as necessary for the "plumbing" part of the problem to which the IETF is best suited to provide solutions.
> 
> As I mentioned earlier, baseline codecs are far more critical for this effort than for non-real-time web browsing. So someone needs to choose one.
> 
> It is my understanding that the overall work in this area will be split between the IETF and the W3C, so the decision must be made by one of those two organizations.
> 
> The W3C could not come to a decision for video codecs when deliberating HTML5, and there is no reason to believe that running the same exercise in that forum with substantially the same participants will yield a different result.
> 
> What makes a substantive between the W3C and the IETF in this particular regard is the procedure documented in RFC3929, which  _guarantees_ that a decision can be made (as long as the working group agrees that the decision must be made). I hope it doesn't come to that, but IETF procedures virtually ensure that we can't deadlock on a decision like the W3C can.
> 
> /a
> _______________________________________________
> RTC-Web mailing list
> RTC-Web at alvestrand.no
> http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/rtc-web