- From: Elad Alon via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2022 16:58:49 +0000
- To: public-webrtc-logs@w3.org
> In fact, doing so risks giving the wrong impression the implementation is compliant when it is not. Youenn has brought up a similar concern. This is unclear to me. Users installing a browser would notice when applications don't work. That the failure makes the browser "compliant" is not going to help such a browser gain/retrain market-share. Implementers are motivated to implement missing functionality, independently of compliance. > Web developers need to know when they're expected to file bugs on vendors and when they should not. Similarly, I don't think Web-developers would refrain from filing a bug over missing functionality under the assumption that a "compliant" browser is complete by definition. I imagine people ask for Firefox and Safari to support tab-capture, without caring whether the spec allows getDisplayMedia() to not offer tab-capture. > I do see some uses of NotSupportedError in specs, e.g. around media types as inputs, and that make sense, but I don't think this issue meets that bar. Where is the bar? -- GitHub Notification of comment by eladalon1983 Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/mediacapture-region/issues/55#issuecomment-1154162580 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Monday, 13 June 2022 16:58:51 UTC