On Wed, 2008-06-04 at 14:06 +0100, Paul Witty wrote: > 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.
The media attribute should directly match what SIP does and only describes the "type" of data, not the content, so a second video channel would be media="video" and the description of the content should be somewhere else (like in name=""). There are good reasons to have multiple video channel, slides are one, or stereoscopic chat or just that SIP allows it. -- Olivier Crête [EMAIL PROTECTED] Collabora Ltd
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
