On 03/23/11 17:10, Bernard Aboba wrote:
> > While there is an obvious need for IETF activity on
underlying
> > protocols, codecs and formats I'm unsure as to how a W3C
RTC group is
> > going to effectively manage any overlaps here.
> So am I. Input here and to the WHATWG and W3C on what people
think would
> be appropriate methods to manage the division of labour would
be
> helpful. I have my opinions, but I'm not the only one whose
opinion matters.
The best suggestion I can come up with is to set up formal
cross-review milestones.
That is, the IETF RTCWEB might produce framework or API
requirements documents that the W3C
RTCWEB WG could review, and once there is agreement on those and
things are further along,
the IETF RTCWEB WG could review a W3C RTCWEB API document for
compatibiity with those
documents.
To me, this seems like both too much and too little; it would
require setting up another level of bureaucratic complexity with
work items that have to be signed off on by multiple participants,
many of which are the same on both sides of the virtual "fence",
while it doesn't do anything that prevents real disagreements or
disconnects to occur.
My preferred working method would be to have each group acknowledge
that its output only makes sense in conjunction with the output of
the other (I think the charters of the 2 already do that), and to
rely on cross membership and people's desire to get useful output to
get the harmonization we want.
Harald