W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webscreens@w3.org > January 2014

Re: Presentation API usage: Mirroring vs Extension

From: Rottsches, Dominik <dominik.rottsches@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2014 12:40:27 +0000
To: "public-webscreens@w3c.org" <public-webscreens@w3c.org>
CC: "Bassbouss, Louay" <louay.bassbouss@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
Message-ID: <187E2BEB-09E1-4508-848D-D93F4B6E4A23@intel.com>
Hi Louay,

On 10 Jan 2014, at 13:46, Bassbouss, Louay <louay.bassbouss@fokus.fraunhofer.de<mailto:louay.bassbouss@fokus.fraunhofer.de>> wrote:

>From my point of view, requestShow is suitable for screen extension as depicted in the first two graphics (extension1.png for local rendering, extension2.png for remote rendering).

Thanks for the detailed diagrams. The first two are exactly what I meant with the two possible implementation scenarios. I think itís very useful to have these as diagrams to refer to.

The question is how to realize mirroring as depicted in last graphic (mirror.png).

With regards to mirroring, we defined in the charter for the CG that those scenarios are out of scope for the CG for now. [0]

However, if Presentation API is implemented in Chrome, one possibility is to use the tab streaming API from a Chrome app, see:
The tab capturing stream can then be sent to the remote page, implementing the mirroring case.


[0] https://github.com/webscreens/presentation-api/wiki/Second-Screen-Community-Group-Charter
Received on Friday, 10 January 2014 12:41:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:23:10 UTC