Thank you Mike and Yoav for your feedback! I accidentally responded with Reply to sender instead of Reply all. Trying again, see my response below.
On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 6:33 PM Mike Taylor <miketa...@chromium.org> wrote: > On 3/14/22 1:30 PM, 'Johannes Kron' via blink-dev wrote: > > Risks > > > Interoperability and Compatibility > > Gecko: Positive (https://www.w3.org/2011/04/webrtc/wiki/December_02_2020) > > Could you please request a more formal position at > https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions? > I've filed a request for a formal position here, https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/619 On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 7:55 PM Yoav Weiss <yoavwe...@chromium.org> wrote: > On Monday, March 14, 2022 at 6:33:31 PM UTC+1 Mike Taylor wrote: > >> On 3/14/22 1:30 PM, 'Johannes Kron' via blink-dev wrote: >> >> Contact emails k...@google.com >> >> Explainer >> https://github.com/drkron/media-capabilities/blob/webrtc_examples/explainer.md#webrtc >> https://github.com/w3c/media-capabilities/pull/191 >> >> Specification https://w3c.github.io/media-capabilities/ >> >> Summary >> >> Extends the MediaCapabilities API to support WebRTC streams. The >> MediaCapabilities API helps websites to make informed decisions on what >> codec, resolution, etc. to use for video playback by providing information >> about whether a configuration is supported and also whether the playback is >> expected to be smooth. This feature extends the MediaCapabilities API to >> also include WebRTC streams. >> >> >> Blink component Blink>Media>Capabilities >> <https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/list?q=component:Blink%3EMedia%3ECapabilities> >> >> TAG review This is a straightforward extension of an existing API. >> >> That's not the right reason for this being exempt from a TAG review. I > think that a TAG review is not needed because this was accepted in the WG > and there's already another browser engine shipping this. > At the same time, seems worthwhile to at least file an FYI TAG review > issue. > I agree that those are better reasons for not doing a full TAG review. I've filed a FYI TAG review issue as you requested, see https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/720 I hope that this is treated as a FYI and is not blocking the Intent to Ship? > Risks >> >> >> Interoperability and Compatibility >> >> Gecko: Positive (https://www.w3.org/2011/04/webrtc/wiki/December_02_2020) >> >> Could you please request a more formal position at >> https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions? >> >> >> WebKit: Shipped/Shipping ( >> https://webkit.org/blog/12033/release-notes-for-safari-technology-preview-134/ >> ) >> >> Web developers: No signals >> >> Any signals from web developers? https://goo.gle/developer-signals > This should have been N/A. Due to the strong support from the working group I didn't see a reason to do an outreach to web developers, especially since this is a relatively straightforward extension of the existing API. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "blink-dev" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to blink-dev+unsubscr...@chromium.org. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAFJBoCQeF9DbkF_MmBB-JwhYbiogVYAQVkaPrVK_d2OTv-PV4A%40mail.gmail.com.
