Re: New Proposal now up for Discussion on the Wiki

Hi Anton, other participants,

thanks for the detailed review of the proposal and your comments.

On 05 Feb 2014, at 18:09, Anton Vayvod <avayvod@google.com> wrote:

> I've just left some comments on the Wiki page, mostly in regards to the device selection. I also tried to answer most of the open questions.

>From your comments on the wiki I understand, in your opinion device selection should be on the UI side. I took at your link to the Chromecast API where the device selection is left to the Cast extension. 

We went through one example which lead us to think enumeration might actually be important: 

The use case we were considering is the ability of the Youtube website to cast/fling to a couple of nearby devices, via different connection methodologies, Chromecast or YouTube’s proprietary pairing.

If you connect a “controller" page to a YouTube page in TV mode [1], the paired targets show up in a UI selection, along with the name of the available Chromecast, as shown here: http://roettsch.es/player_target_list.png

In this case the YouTube page is aware of the available presentation devices and shows them using its own styling and UI. For this to be possible via Presentation API, enumeration with human readable names would be required.

If we only had the option to show here an entry called “Other Presentation Devices” for example, then this entry could be selected and then a separate UA user interface would appear for a second-level screen selection. But IMO this would make the user experience much less consistent. Hence we thought enumeration is useful and important.

It’d be interesting to hear your thoughts. 

Dominik


[1] By going to youtube.com/pair on the controller side and youtube.com/tv (and then navigate to Settings->Pair), and type in the pairing id on the controller side, then watch any video and observe the cast button showing up, listing the paired players.


> Could you also add the open question about restricting the navigation on the second screen? I now think we should be fine without any restrictions.
> 
> On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 10:56 AM, Rottsches, Dominik <dominik.rottsches@intel.com> wrote:
> Dear members of the webscreens CG,
> 
> in the interest of easier discussion and collaboration we have now moved and merged the ideas on how to evolve the API to a Wiki page:
> 
>  https://www.w3.org/community/webscreens/wiki/API_Discussion
> 
> On this page, we documented existing and a new proposed use case "Media Flinging to Multiple Screens", derived requirements from them. Then we documented one proposal how to address the requirements to facilitate the discussion.
> 
> There are open questions and your input is needed in how we should tackle those.
> 
> We encourage everyone to have a look at this unified proposal, evaluate it and take part in the discussion. For example by raising questions on the mailing list or commenting directly in the Wiki using indentation and Wiki-style signatures (Wikimedia Syntax: [~~~~]).
> 
> As the next step, once we reach a level of consensus, we can take the concepts from this page and incorporate them into our Presentation API specification draft.
> 
> Dominik
>

Received on Thursday, 6 February 2014 10:30:48 UTC