Warning: This document has no official status. It is a draft charter for discussion within the Second Screen WG and the W3C Advisory Committee.
The mission of the Second Screen Working Group is to provide specifications that enable web pages to use secondary screens to display web content.
Start date | 1 January 2018 |
---|---|
End date | 31 December 2018 |
Charter extension | See Change History |
Chairs | Anssi Kostiainen |
Team Contacts | François Daoust (0.2 FTE) |
Meeting Schedule | Teleconferences: topic-specific calls
may be held Face-to-face: we will meet during the W3C's annual Technical Plenary week; other additional F2F meetings may be scheduled (up to 2 per year) IRC: active participants, particularly editors, regularly use the #webscreens W3C IRC channel |
Web content is available on an ever expanding array of devices including ebook readers, phones, tablets, laptops, auto displays, and electronic billboards. These devices have a variety of display screens. There are also a variety of mechanisms that allow these devices to use secondary display screens available in the local environment, attached by wired connections or remotely with wireless, peer-to-peer media.
Common attachment methods include video ports like VGA, DisplayPort or HDMI, or wirelessly through Miracast, WiDi, or AirPlay. Wireless screens may be available on a local area network or over the Internet, brokered by a cloud service. A device like a laptop could provide a screen for a smaller device like a phone.
For many of these techniques the operating system hides how the screen is attached and provides ways for native applications to use the screens. Native applications on an operating system can easily use these additional screens without having to know how they are attached to the device. At this point, however, there is no way for a web page to take advantage of these available secondary displays.
The Second Screen Working Group aims at defining simple APIs that allow web applications to show and control web content on one or more secondary displays.
The scope of this Working Group is to define an API that allows a web application to request display of web content on a connected display, with a means to communicate with and control the web content from the initiating page and other authorized pages. Pages may become authorized to control the web content by virtue of sharing an origin with the originating page, explicit user permission, or other facilities provided by the user agent. The API will hide the details of the underlying connection technologies and use familiar, common web technologies for messaging between the authorized pages and the web content shown on the secondary display. The web content may comprise HTML documents, web media types such as images, audio, video, or application-specific media, depending on the capabilities of the secondary display for rendering the media. Application-specific media includes that whose type is known to the controlling page and the connected display, but not necessarily a generic HTML user agent.
The API will provide a means to identify whether requesting display on second screens is likely to be successful, i.e. whether at least one secondary screen is available for display.
The API is agnostic with regard to the display connection used, and also works with display connections that support video only, for example, a TV connected to a laptop with an HDMI connection. In such a usage scenario, the web content displayed on a connected display must be rendered and converted to video before it is sent to a second screen. The user agent may use whatever means the operating system provides to prepare and send the video to a second screen. Any interaction between the authorized web pages and the content displayed on a secondary screen would happen within the bounds of the initiating device since both the pages and the content are rendered on that same device, and only a video representation is sent to the second screen.
Alternatively, if the second screen device understands some other means of transmitting content to a display and a means of two-way message passing, the web content can be rendered by the remote device. In this scenario, a URL to the content to be displayed is sent to the secondary display to be rendered there. Because the content is rendered separately from the initiating user agent, pages hosted by other user agents may be authorized to control the remotely rendered content at the same time.
For a requested piece of web content, how and by which device the content is rendered is an implementation detail. The user agent is responsible for determining which secondary displays are compatible with the content that is requested to be shown through the API.
Sending content to a connected display creates a presentation session. Applications can create multiple presentation sessions to control multiple displays, although synchronization between them is not currently supported by the API.
The specifications produced by this Working Group will include security and privacy considerations. Specifically, the user must always be in control of privacy-sensitive information that may be conveyed through the APIs, such as the visibility or access to secondary displays.
Members of the Working Group should review other Working Groups' deliverables that are identified as being relevant to the Working Group's mission.
To advance to Proposed Recommendation, each specification is expected to have two independent implementations of each feature defined in the specification.
To advance to Proposed Recommendation, interoperability between the independent implementations should be demonstrated. Interoperable user agents hosting the same Presentation API web application should be able to render the same content with the same functionality on supported secondary displays that are compatible with the content to render.
The specifications defined by this Working Group abstract away the means of connecting and different connection technologies. For example, the following are out of scope:
This Working Group will not define or mandate network protocols for sharing content between user agents and secondary displays. For example, the following are out of scope:
To facilitate interoperability among user agents and display devices and encourage adoption of the API, the group may informatively reference existing suites of protocols, either directly in the Presentation API deliverable or in a non-normative companion Note. This Working Group will monitor the outcomes of related discussions in the Second Screen Community Group in particular.
Content mirroring, whereby a web application requests display of the content shown in its own browsing context (i.e., page) on a secondary display, is out of scope. If a web application requests display of itself (same URL) on a connected display, a new browsing context will be created with that URL and rendered on the connected display.
This Working Group will not define or mandate any video or audio codecs.
Draft state indicates the state of the deliverable at the time of the call for participation. Expected completion indicates when the deliverable is projected to become a Recommendation, or otherwise reach a stable state.
This Working Group will follow a test as you commit approach to specification development, for specifications in CR or above.
The Working Group will deliver at least the following specifications:
An API that allows a web application to request display of web content on a connected display, with a means to communicate with and control the web content from the initiating page and other authorized pages.
Draft state: CR / Stable
Expected completion: Q4 2019 — This Working Group does not anticipate further changes to this specification. The Working Group is awaiting satisfaction of the Success Criteria, which require two interoperable implementations of the Presentation API.
The Open Screen Protocol, under incubation in the Second Screen Community Group, is one proposed basis for interoperability, and two implementations based on it would satisfy those criteria. The charter timeline provides additional time for interoperable implementations to be completed and the Success Criteria to be met.
This Working Group plans to assess progress on interoperability and implementation status regularly, and to request re-chartering according to progress on meeting success criteria for the specification.
A second version of the Presentation API that integrates features the Working Group resolved not to include in the first version in the interest of time and feedback from Web developers on the first version. New features that fall within the scope of this Working Group may first be incubated and matured in an appropriate Community Group.
The Working Group's issue tracker lists examples of features that may be integrated. An example of a new feature is a Testing API that will allow automation of the test suites for the Presentation API and Remote Playback API.
Draft state: No draft (builds on the CR) / Exploring
Expected completion: This Working Group does not expect to complete new specifications by the end of this charter and may request to be re-chartered to finalize this work, possibly with a different scope.
An API that allows a web application to request display of media content on a connected display, with a means to control the remote playback from the initiating page and other authorized pages.
Draft state: CR / Stable
Expected completion: Q4 2018 — This Working Group does not anticipate further changes to this specification. The Working Group plans to publish the Remote Playback API as a final Recommendation when the Success Criteria are met.
The Working Group may decide to group the API functions in one or more specifications.
A comprehensive test suite for all features of a specification is necessary to assess the specification's robustness, consistency, and implementability, and to promote interoperability between user agents. Therefore, each specification must have a companion test suite, which should be completed before transition to Candidate Recommendation, and which must be completed with an implementation report before transition to Proposed Recommendation. Additional tests may be added to the test suite at any stage of the Recommendation track, and the maintenance of an implementation report is encouraged.
Additionally, this Working Group will improve test automation for the Presentation API and Remote Playback API test suites. This will be done through the adoption of a Testing API, developed as a Presentation API Level 2 specification. The Testing API will also allow developers to use automation to test their own Web applications that make use of the above-mentioned APIs.
Other non-normative documents may be created for each specification, for example:
Note: See changes from this initial schedule on the group home page. | |||||
Specification | FPWD | CR | PR | Rec | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Presentation API | - | - | Q4 2019 | Q4 2019 | |
Presentation API Level 2 | Q2 2018 | - | - | - | |
Remote Playback API | - | - | Q4 2018 | Q4 2018 |
The initial draft of the Presentation API was prepared by the Second Screen Community Group. Upon approval of the Working Group, the Community Group ceased its work on the Presentation API specification. The Community Group is currently focused on incubating the Open Screen Protocol for the APIs defined in this Working Group. The Community Group may also work on other related deliverables where it is not clear enough how to proceed for it to be a work item for a Working Group. The Community Group is only one possible source for work under future Working Group charters, but can serve to do initial exploration for some future work items.
The specifications produced by this Working Group adhere to the web's security model defined in the HTML specification published by the Web Platform Working Group.
Common web technologies that this Working Group could refer to for messaging include Web Messaging and the Web Socket API defined by the Web Platform Working Group.
No external dependencies against the specifications of this Working Group have been identified.
For all specifications, this Working Group will seek horizontal review for accessibility, internationalization, performance, privacy, and security with the relevant Working and Interest Groups, and with the TAG. Invitation for review must be issued during each major standards-track document transition, including FPWD and at least 3 months before CR, and should be issued when major changes occur in a specification.
Additional technical coordination with the following Groups will be made, per the W3C Process Document:
HTMLMediaElement
interface that the Remote Playback API specification extends. The Presentation API does not have strong dependencies on any given set of protocols. The following is a tentative list of external bodies the Working Group should collaborate with to allow the Presentation API to be implemented on top of widely deployed attachment methods for connected displays:
To be successful, the Second Screen Working Group is expected to have 6 or more active participants for its duration, and to have the participation of industry leaders in fields relevant to the specifications it produces.
The Chairs and specification Editors are expected to contribute half a working day per week towards the Working Group. There is no minimum requirement for other Participants. This Working Group will also allocate the necessary resources for building Test Suites for each specification.
The group also welcomes non-Members to contribute technical submissions for consideration, with the agreement from each participant to Royalty-Free licensing of those submissions under the W3C Patent Policy.
Teleconferences will be conducted on an as-needed basis.
This group primarily conducts its work on the public mailing list public-secondscreen@w3.org. Administrative tasks may be conducted in Member-only communications.
Information about the group (deliverables, participants, face-to-face meetings, teleconferences, etc.) is available from the Second Screen Working Group home page.
As explained in the W3C Process Document (section 3.3), this group will seek to make decisions when there is consensus and with due process. The expectation is that typically, an editor or other participant makes an initial proposal, which is then refined in discussion with members of the group and other reviewers, and consensus emerges with little formal voting being required. However, if a decision is necessary for timely progress, but consensus is not achieved after careful consideration of the range of views presented, the Chairs should put a question out for voting within the group (allowing for remote asynchronous participation -- using, for example, email and/or web-based survey techniques) and record a decision, along with any objections. The matter should then be considered resolved unless and until new information becomes available.
Any resolution taken in a face-to-face meeting or teleconference is to be considered provisional until 10 working days after the publication of the resolution in draft minutes sent to the working groups mailing list. If no objections are raised on the mailing list within that time, the resolution will be considered to have consensus as a resolution of the Working Group.
This charter is written in accordance with Section 3.4, Votes of the W3C Process Document and includes no voting procedures beyond what the Process Document requires.
This Working Group operates under the W3C Patent Policy (5 February 2004 Version). To promote the widest adoption of Web standards, W3C seeks to issue Recommendations that can be implemented, according to this policy, on a Royalty-Free basis.
For more information about disclosure obligations for this group, please see the W3C Patent Policy Implementation.
This Working Group will use the W3C Software and Document license for all its deliverables.
This charter for the Second Screen Working Group has been created according to section 5 of the Process Document. In the event of a conflict between this document or the provisions of any charter and the W3C Process, the W3C Process shall take precedence.
The following table lists details of all changes from the initial charter, per the W3C Process Document (section 5.2.3):
Charter Period | Start Date | End Date | Changes |
---|---|---|---|
Initial Charter | 13 October 2014 | 31 October 2016 | none |
Rechartered | 3 November 2016 | 31 October 2017 |
|
Extended | 17 October 2017 | 31 December 2017 | End date adjusted |
Rechartered | 1 January 2018 | 31 December 2018 |
|
Copyright© 2017 W3C ® (MIT, ERCIM, Keio, Beihang), All Rights Reserved. W3C liability, trademark and document use rules apply.