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

[Alex Eleftheriadis]

I think this is a very good idea (separating the two activities). Codecs have evolved a lot over the past several years, and there are a LOT of important details that may be lost to the uninitiated. 

Making a decision is always easy. Making the right one is tough, and it takes a lot of work. I sure hope the group (RTCWEB or another one) does take the time to truly understand the engineering ramifications of the various choices.

And I still thing that leaving it out would be the best choice. 

--Alex  

On Jan 18, 2011, at 4:38 PM, Peter Musgrave wrote:

> 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
> 
> _______________________________________________
> dispatch mailing list
> dispatch at ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch