Re: [Standards] Jingle: one RTP application type to bind them all?

[Paul Witty]

Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
I was thinking of a direct analogy to the media field saying "audio" or
"video" in your m-line in SDP. So like:
<jingle>
  <content name="asdf">
    <description xmlns="...rtp" media="audio">
      <payload-type>
      <payload-type>
    </description>
    <transport/>
  </content>
</jingle>

Then we'd just define some features to explain what media you supported,
like:

urn:...:jingle-rtp#media-audio
urn:...:jingle-rtp#media-video
    

Works for me.
  

Add me to the list in favour as well.  What values are we planning to 
support for media?  Clearly 'audio' and 'video', and I'd like to push 
for 'content', which would be a second video stream used for things such 
as slide-shows.  Would we then support multiple channels of the same 
type?  I can't see a good reason why we would, but others may disagree.

I also wonder at the purpose of the 'name' attribute of the content.  If 
we have multiple streams of one type, then it is needed to identify each 
stream, but otherwise there would be no need for another unique 
identifier when peer & content type already uniquely identifies a 
stream.  Although in this case, the media type would need to be in the 
'content' tag rather than 'description', for use in identifying the 
stream when sending things like candidates.

--

Paul