+1. No objection to moving forward but a bit of additional cleanup would be nice.
On Jan 20, 2015, at 3:53 AM, Kiran Kumar Guduru <kiran.guduru@samsung.com<mailto:kiran.guduru@samsung.com>> wrote:
I don't object this paper to be published as FPWD.
But a small correction that I can suggest is, to update the examples in section 3 or mark a note that 'this section will be updated later'.
For now, there is no difference between the examples, example 1 and example 2.
Thanks,
Kiran.
------- Original Message -------
Sender : Stefan Håkansson LK<stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com<mailto:stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com>>
Date : Jan 19, 2015 19:03 (GMT+09:00)
Title : CfC to publish FPWD of Screen Capture API; deadline January 30
Text: We propose to publish a First Public Working Draft of the Screen
Capture API, and this is a Call for Consensus to do so, using the
following draft as the basis:
This CfC satisfies the group's requirement to "record the group's
decision to request advancement".
By publishing this FPWD, the group sends a signal to the community to
begin reviewing the document. The FPWD reflects where the group is on
this spec at the time of publication; it does _not_ necessarily mean
there is consensus on the spec's contents.
If you have any comments or concerns about this CfC, please reply to
this e-mail by January 30 at the latest. Positive response is
preferred and encouraged, and silence will be considered as agreement
with the proposal.
(Note that the Screen Capture API document is developed in the
Media Capture TF, but it is for the parent WGs to decide about advancing
documents - that's why this mail is to the WebRTC WG.)
Harald and Stefan
<201501201722656_Z5JE7EUA.gif>
