A group of like-minded individuals that are interested in the Object-RTC API model for WebRTC. It's likely these individuals or organizations are also taking part in the IETF RTCWEB and W3C WebRTC working group discussions.
We are changing the CG name from ORCA to ORTC as requested by some of our members and other W3C members for various reasons discussed in that last CG meeting. Minutes can be found here: http://ortc.org/ortc-cg-meetings/
After discussing this with the W3C we had the choice to a.) change the name to ORTC but keep the current ORCA URI or b.) set up an entirely new CG. Since we didn’t want any confusion (ORTC CG name with a ORCA URI) we opted for the second option.
We have been told that a second legal review should not be necessary by your sponsoring organization since the new CG is simply replacing the existing CG.
Here is what that means to you as a member of ORCA:
• Introduction to the CG
• Quick review of progress to date
• Overview of meeting objectives
- Existing proposals review
- New proposals & review
- API discussion
• Closing remarks
• Action items
- Table CG name change to ORTC (via Silvia Pfeiffer)
NOTE: If you are on the public mail list but have not yet joined the Community Group but would like to attend the meeting you may certainly do so. However, if you are planning on making a contribution you will need to join the CG and make those contributions on the mail list.
NOTE: There were some issues with the software we were using (Ustream Producer) so only part of the presentation was live/recorded. We do have the entire Walkthrough recorded on another camera. We will get that up on YouTube as quickly as we can.
We would encourage everyone that attended to join the Community Group so we can continue to evolve the API alongside the current WebRTC work.
Since many people interested in WebRTC will be at IETF 88 in Vancouver, Robin Raymond, Chair of the ORCA Community Group has offered to lead a walkthrough of the ORTC specification from 3-5pm Sunday November 3.
This is encouraging progress, but it’s just the first step. It would be great to get more people using this implementation and giving feedback about its usability to this Community Group. It would be even better to see others implementing the spec and sharing their implementation and interoperability experience here.