W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-fx@w3.org > January to March 2011

Re: Fullscreen API

From: Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>
Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2011 11:18:22 -0800
Cc: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>, "public-fx@w3.org" <public-fx@w3.org>
Message-id: <ACCA8931-7C49-453A-8552-63FB7F51BF56@me.com>
To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
On Feb 8, 2011, at 10:55 AM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:

> On Feb 8, 2011, at 10:43 AM, Doug Schepers wrote:
>> Hi, Maciej-
>> Maciej Stachowiak wrote (on 2/8/11 1:22 PM):
>>> On some level it doesn't matter where this gets done.
>> That's the level I'm concentrating on.  I am more concerned with being able to find somewhere convenient to start on it quickly.
>>> But on a
>>> technical level, the full screen API has little to do with CSS and
>>> almost nothing to do with SVG.
>> In a purely technical sense, it has almost nothing to do with HTML either... though since HTML is by far the most common Web markup, it's logical that it would be used more with HTML content than SVG.  But no matter where it happens, I'd expect it to extend the Element and Document interface for any markup language supported in the browser, not just HTML, SVG, MathML, etc.
>> I don't think arguing about where it "belongs" is a productive or satisfying topic... the only real implication for that is if the resulting spec has input from the right authors and implementers, and any appropriate IP concerns are covered.
>> If the HTML WG is willing to take this on and make progress quickly, I have no problem with that.  I'm just trying to get standardization started so authors can start using it everywhere.
> I think Web Apps WG would be the most appropriate place, since this is a markup-language-independent API. I understand there are charter issues, but it's not in the SVG or CSS WG charters either, so if some charter has to be changed, it may as well be Web Apps. Or I suppose you could make an argument for including it in CSS OM, based on the fact  that it deals with some CSS pseudo-classes.
>>  It so happens that it fits thematically with other "effects" like filters, gradients, animations, etc., so I thought of the FX TF.
> Doesn't really seem thematically related to me. Those are all about graphical effects inside the content. Full screen is about presentation at the window level, like window.resizeTo/window.moveTo. It's not an "effect" in the sense of this TF at all. I guess I'm not seeing the relationship.

I agree that CSS or SVG don't seem like the right places for the fullscreen API. There are some other more script-driven APIs that fall into the same boat, like the animation proposal: <http://webstuff.nfshost.com/anim-timing/Overview.html>.

Web Apps seems most appropriate to me.


Received on Tuesday, 8 February 2011 19:18:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:49:37 UTC