- From: Bassbouss, Louay <louay.bassbouss@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
- Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2014 14:39:01 +0000
- To: Francois Daoust <fd@w3.org>, Mark Scott <markdavidscott@google.com>
- CC: "Kostiainen, Anssi" <anssi.kostiainen@intel.com>, "Rottsches, Dominik" <dominik.rottsches@intel.com>, Anton Vayvod <avayvod@google.com>, "public-secondscreen@w3.org" <public-secondscreen@w3.org>, "public-webscreens@w3.org" <public-webscreens@w3.org>, "mark a. foltz" <mfoltz@google.com>
Thanks Francois, CIL Louay > -----Original Message----- > From: Francois Daoust [mailto:fd@w3.org] > Sent: Donnerstag, 27. November 2014 14:20 > To: Mark Scott; Bassbouss, Louay > Cc: Kostiainen, Anssi; Rottsches, Dominik; Anton Vayvod; public- > secondscreen@w3.org; public-webscreens@w3.org; mark a. foltz > Subject: Multiple controlling pages (Was: Re: Allow page to designate itself as > presentation session) > > On 2014-11-26 04:05, Mark Scott wrote: > [...] > > The main gap necessary to allow multiple simultaneous senders is on > > the messaging side; the sender side doesn't change much, but the > > presentation session needs to differentiate between senders (can be > > done at the app level), and needs to be able to send messages back to > > all senders (ideally, individually, though broadcast could work with > > app-level filtering). > > Being able to send a private message to a particular sender sounds > important. Sticking to the Poker example, the Poker table screen would want > to distribute cards to each sender individually. Cheating would be easy (e.g. > through custom scripts à la Greasemonkey) if players received the whole > distribution. > > A broadcast message can easily be emulated with a simple "for" loop and I > don't think there are many network optimizations that a browser could do to > implement it differently. Or is there? [Louay] I think for loop is fine to do broadcast. > > > > > We'd have to decide if we want this to be in scope, but as the gaming > > example shows, it is actually useful to support this. > > I note that the possibility to have multiple controlling pages is in > scope of the working group per charter [1]: > "pages hosted by other user agents may be authorized to control the > remotely rendered content *at the same time*." > > Actually, that was one of the requests for clarification received during > the internal charter review. > > Whatever the solution, it is going to impact how these sessions are > exposed to receivers since "navigator.presentation.session" is a > singleton right now. It might be good to handle the possibility for > receivers to have multiple senders as soon as possible. [Louay] I think we need to clearly describe what a "session" is. Currently session is like a channel. In multiple senders case, we need multiple channels but not necessary multiple sessions. What do you think about this proposal? session.onconnect = function(evt){ var c = e.channel; c.postMessage("Hello Sender, you are now connected"); c.onmessage = function(){...} c.onstatechange = function(){...} } > > Francois.
Received on Thursday, 27 November 2014 14:39:55 UTC