13790 2011-08-16 10:16:09 +0000 Rename localStreams and remoteStreams to sendStreams and receiveStreams or similar since you may send a stream that is received from one peer to another and then it ends up in localStreams (although it's not local) 2012-07-18 18:41:28 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified WHATWG HTML unspecified Other other RESOLVED WONTFIX http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#interface-definitions-0 WebRTC P3 normal Unsorted 1 contributor ian ian mike per-erik.brodin contributor oldest_to_newest 55224 0 contributor 2011-08-16 10:16:09 +0000 Specification: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/complete/video-conferencing-and-peer-to-peer-communication.html Multipage: http://www.whatwg.org/C#interface-definitions-0 Complete: http://www.whatwg.org/c#interface-definitions-0 Comment: Rename localStreams and remoteStreams to sendStreams and receiveStreams or similar since you may send a stream that is received from one peer to another and then it ends up in localStreams (although it's not local) Posted from: 194.237.142.21 User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/534.26+ (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0 Safari/534.26+ Ubuntu/10.10 (2.30.6-1ubuntu5) Epiphany/2.30.6 56139 1 ian 2011-08-31 23:55:59 +0000 Well renaming it to sendStream/receiveStreams wouldn't make it any clearer since then you'd have a stream in both lists, so by definition you'd have a sent stream in the received list and vice versa. :-) 56219 2 per-erik.brodin 2011-09-02 16:23:27 +0000 I don't see a problem in that the stream ends up in both lists, just that a stream can not be local and remote at the same time (although it can be sent and received at the same time). 60740 3 ian 2011-12-01 23:14:02 +0000 WebRTC is now done by the public-webrtc@w3.org group.