W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-secondscreen@w3.org > November 2016

Re: [remote-playback] Add a section about browser initiated remote playback

From: François Daoust via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2016 08:54:14 +0000
To: public-secondscreen@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-258089710-1478163250-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
The Presentation API uses the expression "from the browser" for a 
similar feature, so I suggest we do that here as well.

I think it would be useful to relate that feature to the user 
interface that user agents expose to users for media controls too:

I would expect most implementations will simply add a button there. As
 with the Presentation API, the feature may be coupled with the 
selection of the remote device, so we may do not want to restrict the 
feature to a control in this user interface (one could argue that the 
notion of user interface is flexible enough to encompass that 
possibility, though).

In short, I would suggest to replace the first paragraph by:
  A user agent MAY support <a data-lt="establish a connection with the
 remote playback device">
  connecting to a remote playback device</a> from the browser, e.g. by
 including appropriate
  controls to <a data-lt="expose a user interface to the user">the 
user interface that is exposed
  to the user</a>. This feature is known as <dfn>browser initiated 
remote playback</dfn>. A
  <a>user agent</a> that supports <a>browser initiated remote 
playback</a> SHOULD initiate
  the remote playback only when the user has expressed an intention to
 do so via a user gesture,
  for example by clicking a button in the browser.

... and to add the following term to the terminology section:
 a user interface to the user</a>

I thought the spec already had some prose around these lines. While 
it's not a change of API surface per se, that seems an important 
feature to highlight. It provides additional context to understand 
some aspects of #41 in particular: the transition to remote playback 
may happen under the hoods without the app doing anything, and 
potential changes of behavior may "surprise" the app.

In other words, I wonder whether we may include that text in the 
updated Working Draft that the group is about to publish. @anssiko 
@avayvod what do you think?

GitHub Notification of comment by tidoust
Please view or discuss this issue at 
using your GitHub account
Received on Thursday, 3 November 2016 08:54:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 3 November 2016 08:54:21 UTC