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@alvestrand.no http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/rtc-web