Collection of Screensharing-related UX Hints

[eladalon1983]

Ma ha'matzav TAG?!

I'm requesting a TAG review of a collection of UX hints related to screensharing. They are too far apart to be described together, but close enough that they can be reviewed as a group - as suggested by @chrishtr on this thread.

• Explainers:
  • DisplayMediaStreamConstraints.selfBrowserSurface explainer: [.md] / [Google Doc]
  • DisplayMediaStreamConstraints.surfaceSwitching explainer: [.md] / [Google Doc]
  • DisplayMediaStreamConstraints.systemAudio explainer: [.md] / [Google Doc]
  • MediaTrackSupportedConstraints.suppressLocalAudioPlayback explainer: [.md] / [Google Doc]
  • displaySurface Constraint explainer: [.md] / [Google Doc]
• Specification URL: All of these new hints are part of w3c/mediacapture-screen-share. Their respective PRs are:
  • PR for DisplayMediaStreamConstraints.selfBrowserSurface
  • PR for DisplayMediaStreamConstraints.surfaceSwitching
  • PR for DisplayMediaStreamConstraints.systemAudio
  • PR for MediaTrackSupportedConstraints.suppressLocalAudioPlayback
  • PR for displaySurface Constraint
• Tests: N/A
• User research: N/A
• Security and Privacy self-review: Covered by the existing questionnaire.
• Primary contacts (and their relationship to the specification):
  • Elad Alon (@eladalon1983), Google
• Organization(s)/project(s) driving the specification: Google
• External status/issue trackers for this specification (publicly visible, e.g. Chrome Status):
  • DisplayMediaStreamConstraints.selfBrowserSurface ChromeStatus entry
  • DisplayMediaStreamConstraints.surfaceSwitching ChromeStatus entry
  • DisplayMediaStreamConstraints.systemAudio ChromeStatus entry
  • MediaTrackSupportedConstraints.suppressLocalAudioPlayback ChromeStatus entry
  • displaySurface Constraint ChromeStatus entry

Further details:

• I have reviewed the TAG's Web Platform Design Principles
• Relevant time constraints or deadlines: N/A
• The group where the work on this specification is currently being done: W3C WebRTC Working Group
• Major unresolved issues with or opposition to this specification: N/A
• This work is being funded by: Google

We'd prefer the TAG provide feedback as:
💬 leave review feedback as a comment in this issue and @-notify @eladalon1983

[eladalon1983]

2022-06-16: Added DisplayMediaStreamConstraints.surfaceSwitching to the list of changes this TAG review is for.

[maxpassion]

Hello Elad @eladalon1983,

We have a discussion in our TAG breakout B meeting, we currently have the following comments:

1. Could you please elaborate more on the multi-stakeholders support of those proposed features?
2. Please do not use google docs for the explainers. You can refer to https://tag.w3.org/explainers/ for explainer writing.

[maxpassion]

Since there is no response for the comments for a while, close this for now. Please re-open it when necessary.

[eladalon1983]

Apologies for not responding earlier. I am on extended PTO at the moment and so I try to limit work to keeping-the-lights-on.

1. Could you please elaborate more on the multi-stakeholders support of those proposed features?

1. Yes.
   • Each of these mini-features links a PR that was merged with the approval of one Mozilla rep and one Apple rep.
   • The linked ChromeStatus entries each reference a request for an official position from Mozilla and Apple. As of the time of this writing, not all of these have received an official response.

2. Please do not use google docs for the explainers. You can refer to https://tag.w3.org/explainers/ for explainer writing.

2. I will migrate the explainers and @mention you (@maxpassion) with a request to reopen this thread. This will likely happen in about a month.

[eladalon1983]

Hi @maxpassion. The explainers are now also available in .md form here:

• DisplayMediaStreamConstraints.selfBrowserSurface explainer
• DisplayMediaStreamConstraints.surfaceSwitching explainer
• DisplayMediaStreamConstraints.systemAudio explainer
• MediaTrackSupportedConstraints.suppressLocalAudioPlayback explainer
• displaySurface Constraint explainer

Could you please re-open this issue and review?