- From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2014 12:57:33 -0700
- To: cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>
- Cc: "public-media-capture@w3.org" <public-media-capture@w3.org>
On 24 April 2014 12:15, cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org> wrote: > Something doesn't make sense here. If Alice is really sharing a specific > application, no other processes cannot overlap its painting area. On the > other hand, if Alice is sharing her entire desktop, I'd expect Bob to see > the contents of the IM. Aside from the double negative here, I think that you are confusing two separate things. In the whole-screen sharing context, yes, everything is seen, warts and all. In the application sharing context, that application is all that is shared. If something causes that application to be occluded, the occluded area needs to be either frozen or greyed. To show the thing that is doing the occluding is an over-share, which violates user expectations. To continue to show the occluded content means that there is something that is shared that the user is unaware of, violating another expectation. This is talking about the latter.
Received on Thursday, 24 April 2014 19:58:01 UTC