search

screen-share / element-capture

https://screen-share.github.io/element-capture/
19 stars 6 forks source link

Formalize the restriction transformation #13

Closed eladalon1983 closed 1 year ago

eladalon1983 commented 1 year ago

This PR formalizes what restrictTo() does a bit better, but does not yet go all the way. (Hence some TODOs.)

Preview | Diff

eladalon1983 commented 1 year ago

Some initial comments to align this with parts of view transitions

At the moment, I see view transitions as an implementation artifact of Chrome, and not a requirement we should consciously add to the spec. I think that if we phrase the spec correctly, theoretical implementation may choose to render twice, or to force all other stacking contexts to become transparent, or to use any other approach - so long as the result is identical.

From an ergonomics point of view, it may be worth having some signal back to the captured application as to why capture is not working.

The captured application is not necessarily even aware that it's being captured. Consider:

I think it's up to the capturer to inform the capturee, if necessary. I think the browser should not tell the captured application that it's being captured.

eladalon1983 commented 1 year ago

@baylesj, could you please also take a look?

eladalon1983 commented 1 year ago

I've made significant changes to this PR, so PTAL, @mfoltzgoogle and @baylesj.

baylesj commented 1 year ago

@baylesj, could you please also take a look?

Overall looks good to me. Is there a straightforward way to view this as rendered and styled HTML to check that part of it?

eladalon1983 commented 1 year ago

@baylesj, could you please also take a look?

Overall looks good to me. Is there a straightforward way to view this as rendered and styled HTML to check that part of it?

image

Check out these two links.

khushalsagar commented 1 year ago

Discussed offline, we'll file a csswg issue to resolve the question on implicit vs explicit rendering constraints.

eladalon1983 commented 1 year ago

Thanks for the review everyone!

Mark, apologies for not waiting for an official LGTM, but I think all of your comments have been addressed, and I'd like to send an i2p for this earlier. If you have any more open issues, I'd be happy to deal with them in follow-up PRs.