Re: Proposal to abandon work on “Capture Handle - Bootstrapping collaboration when screen sharing”

On the one hand: "disagreements seem to be solely over final API shapes to
standardize."
On the other hand: "I don't think we should solve more features for
loosely-coupled applications atm
<https://github.com/w3c/mediacapture-handle/issues/68#issuecomment-1285605351>
"

There appears to be a contradiction here. It appears that at least some
disagreements are quite fundamental.

On Tue, Feb 7, 2023 at 5:51 PM Bernard Aboba <Bernard.Aboba@microsoft.com>
wrote:

>
>
>
>
> * The chairs have considered the proposal to abandon WEBRTC WG work on
> “Capture Handle - Bootstrapping collaboration when screen sharing”, which
> was presented at the January 17 WEBRTC WG virtual interim. We have
> concluded that there is no reason to issue a “Call for Consensus” (CfC).
> CfCs are generally issued to confirm consensus. Since the chairs at their
> discretion have already determined that no consensus exists for the
> proposal as currently formulated, we have concluded that issuing a CfC for
> stopping work in the WEBRTC WG is unnecessary. A Working Group’s scope of
> work is established in its charter, not in any single published document.
> Screen capture APIs remain in scope of this WG.  A WG can discontinue a
> document its members no longer have any interest in working on, in which
> case the document is frozen and remains. But this does not fit here, as the
> WG agrees the use cases are valid, and disagreements seem to be solely over
> final API shapes to standardize. The WG has heard no argument that the use
> cases are unimportant or that APIs to solve them should be stopped or
> unshipped for lack of interest. A WG can also send back to incubation a
> document it feels the WG is not ready to approach. But this also does not
> seem to fit here since APIs have shipped and general consensus exists for
> solving the problem the API solves. The chairs will monitor developments
> going forward. *
> Bernard
>
> For the Chairs
>