REC Update Request for Web Real-Time Communications API - webrtc

[dontcallmedom]

Document title, URLs, estimated publication date

WebRTC: Real-Time Communication in Browsers
Editors draft: https://w3c.github.io/webrtc-pc/
Rec with proposed amendments: https://www.w3.org/TR/2024/REC-webrtc-20241008/
Date: TBD after approval

Abstract

This document defines a set of ECMAScript APIs in WebIDL to allow media and generic application data to be sent to and received from another browser or device implementing the appropriate set of real-time protocols. This specification is being developed in conjunction with a protocol specification developed by the IETF RTCWEB group and an API specification to get access to local media devices.

Status

This section describes the status of this document at the time of its publication. A list of current W3C publications and the latest revision of this technical report can be found in the W3C technical reports index at https://www.w3.org/TR/.

This document includes Candidate Amendments.

Its associated test suite has been used to build an implementation report of the API at the time of its initial publication as a Recommendation. That test suite has been updated to integrate proposed and candidates amendments identified since then, and an updated implementation report focused on the implementation status of these amendments has been used to select features with double implementation as proposed amendments, now fully incorporated in this version of the Recommendation.

This document was published by the Web Real-Time Communications Working Group as a Recommendation using the Recommendation track. It includes candidate amendments, introducing substantive changes and new features since the previous Recommendation.

W3C recommends the wide deployment of this specification as a standard for the Web.

A W3C Recommendation is a specification that, after extensive consensus-building, is endorsed by W3C and its Members, and has commitments from Working Group members to royalty-free licensing for implementations. Future updates to this Recommendation may incorporate new features.

Candidate additions are marked in the document.

Candidate corrections are marked in the document.

This document was produced by a group operating under the W3C Patent Policy. W3C maintains a public list of any patent disclosures made in connection with the deliverables of the group; that page also includes instructions for disclosing a patent. An individual who has actual knowledge of a patent which the individual believes contains Essential Claim(s) must disclose the information in accordance with section 6 of the W3C Patent Policy.

This document is governed by the 03 November 2023 W3C Process Document.

Link to group's decision to request the update

https://www.w3.org/2024/09/24-webrtc-minutes.html#f6ff

Link to Last Call for Review of Proposed Amendments

https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-review-announce/2024Oct/0002.html

Wide Review of Proposed Amendments

No input received

Issues addressed

N/A

Link to internal AC Review results

https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/33280/webrtc-2024-amendments/results

Formal Objections

None

Implementation

https://www.w3.org/2024/10/webrtc-amendments-interop.html

Patent disclosures

N/A

[plehegar]

It's not clear that the changes received horizontal reviews, part of the wide review phase. Can you point to where the horizontal review requests were submitted?

For example, @ylafon points out that add url attribute to RTCIceCandidate is incorrect since the current recommendation is to use USVString instead of DOMString , and a TAG review would have flagged that. See also 4.9 Defining 'string', Internationalization Best Practices for Spec Developers and 8.2. Represent strings appropriately, Web Platform Design Principles.

[dontcallmedom]

Isn't the Last call review a call for wide review? We didn't receive any such input during the last call review period.

[aphillips]

While they are part of wide review, horizontal reviews have to be requested by the WG from the various horizontal groups. See here in the Guide. I18N last reviewed WebRTC in 2016, so any changes since then haven't been seen by us.

[dontcallmedom]

the guide mentions FPWD and CR; my assumption had been that a Last Call review was an implicit call for horizontal reviews of the Proposed Amendments (since it's only the Proposed Amendments we want wide review on in the context of this process).

But if I indeed need to file horizontal review request, I'll do it; I just wish this had been made clearer (or even unnecessary given the formality of the Last Call review process)

[dontcallmedom]

I have checked the 3 previously published Updated Recs, and none of them went through explicit requests for horizontal reviews as far as I can tell; I'm not thrilled to discover that requirement so late in the process.

(re RTCIceCandidate.url type, this is out of scope of this transition since this is only about proposed amendments ("must show that the proposed amendments have received wide review"), and that one is a candidate amendment)

[dontcallmedom]

•  WebRTC API 2024-12-10 > 2025-01-31 a11y-request#98
• Web Real-Time Communications API 2024-12-10 > 2025-01-31 i18n-request#254
• WebRTC API 2024-10-12 > 2025-01-31 w3cping/privacy-request#152
• WebRTC API 2024-10-12 > 2025-01-31 security-request#80
• WebRTC API Proposed Amendments w3ctag/design-reviews#1026

[plehegar]

But if I indeed need to file horizontal review request, I'll do it; I just wish this had been made clearer (or even unnecessary given the formality of the Last Call review process)

I created a pull request to also mention this case related to horizontal reviews in the Guide.