Re: [rtcweb] Call for Consensus on Use Case for Screen/Application/Desktop sharing

[Saúl Ibarra Corretgé <[e-mail]>]

On Sep 19, 2011, at 9:02 AM, Magnus Westerlund wrote:

> WG,
> 
> There where some discussion in the Interim meeting last week about a
> Screen/Application/Desktop sharing support use case. My take away from
> the discussion is that this use cases is likely well enough understood
> to actually start a consensus call now. However, to us WG chairs it was
> clear that the use case in question actually needs to be split into two
> parts.
> 
> A) Where the RTCWEB enabled browser can use a local application window,
> the whole desktop or a Screen as a media source that can be encoded and
> transported over the peerConnection for displaying/playback at the peer.
> 
> B) Where a remote peer can provide one or more input types such as mouse
> and keyboard to control the local system, not only including the
> browser, but also other operating system resources. This clearly can
> only happen after additional consent, most likely on a per occasion
> consent.
> 
> My interpretation is that A only allows for application sharing in
> conferencing contexts, like in the WEBEX session the Interim meeting was
> held with where we shared slides. Where the combination of A and B is
> providing for VNC/Remote desktop.
> 
> Thus the question to the WG is the following.
> 
> 1) Do you support or object the inclusion of use case A, B or Both in
> our Use case document?
> 

I'd go for both.

> 2) Do you have additional comments for or against either of the use cases?
> 

As Harald already said, this is far from being an easy task, so I wonder if this should be defined as a standardized use case or a 'mandatory feature'.


--
Saúl Ibarra Corretgé
AG Projects