Screenshare-with-audio-on-Discord-with-Linux VS sw-transfer-stream

We can create virtual microphones, cameras, etc., e.g., and capture those devices using Web API's; see https://github.com/guest271314/SpeechSynthesisRecorder/issues/17, https://github.com/edisionnano/Screenshare-with-audio-on-Discord-with-Linux. See also --use-fake-device-for-media-stream, --use-file-for-fake-video-capture flags on Chromium-based browsers

Chromium and Chrome refuses to capture monitor devices on Linux. Read this https://github.com/edisionnano/Screenshare-with-audio-on-Discord-with-Linux README and the README at https://github.com/guest271314/captureSystemAudio very carefully. At best you can capture tab audio, not whatever is output to speakears and headphones, in spite of the systemAudio constraints, which is poorly named, and actually misleading.

Screen sharing with audio in Discord works fine.

If you are actually trying to record output to speakers and headphones, not just microphone input see https://github.com/edisionnano/Screenshare-with-audio-on-Discord-with-Linux, https://github.com/guest271314/captureSystemAudio.

This github project does a great job of explaining the problems with discord screensharing on linux (as well as a solution). It also mentions to a standalone project that functions as a temporary replacement for discord screen sharing if you install the dependencies (e.g. Pipewire).

Also I see all this work put in to seemingly unify the development processes between two different operating systems that somewhat undoes features that android already had, so i have to assume that this was done so android and ios could be updated with the same features simultaneously, but we already see what that looks like - a bunch of bugs on different android hardware and versions. And in all this time that this process to unify the development of the mobile app was worked on, there's a feature in the voice & video recommendations on the discord feedback website that has by far surpassed every other request in that section as something the community actually wants, a feature that has gotten daily comments for over 2 years, which is to fix the sound when sharing an application in linux - a process with a pretty thoroughly documented solution here

To achieve this specific task, once an HTML page is loaded into the browser, and a ServiceWorker is registered for that scope, the server does not need to remain active to maintain the functionality of intercepting requests from the Web page (popup window) to the ServiceWorker, where the ServiceWorker can itself make requests to, for example, the same local server to execute parec and pipe output to multiple EventSource responses within the same initial connection, or pipe data to a single ReadableStream served with Response() and event.respondWith(), e.g., see https://github.com/guest271314/offscreen-webrtc, https://github.com/guest271314/sw-transfer-stream.

I've already built it https://github.com/guest271314/captureSystemAudio#web-accessible-resources-transferable-streams-media-capture-transform-breakout-box, https://github.com/guest271314/captureSystemAudio/blob/master/native_messaging/capture_system_audio/capture_system_audio.js; see also https://github.com/guest271314/sw-transfer-stream and https://github.com/guest271314/offscreen-webrtc. I'm just trying to reduce steps https://github.com/guest271314/requestClient.

Yes, you can create an iframe and/or a new window that you have complete control of to execute arbitrary code using either localhost or an extension; e.g., https://github.com/guest271314/sw-transfer-stream, https://github.com/guest271314/offscreen-webrtc.

Open new window to transfer data from ServiceWorker to arbitrary Web page https://github.com/guest271314/sw-transfer-stream

There are workarounds which involve using an iframe https://github.com/guest271314/persistent-serviceworker/tree/main/chromium_extension_web_accessible_resources_iframe_message_event or window.open() https://github.com/guest271314/sw-transfer-stream or and offscreen document https://github.com/guest271314/offscreen-webrtc with WebRTC - however that involves loading an entire HTML document, and each has its own deficienfies - with all of the Window features that we do not really need just to transfer data between the Web page I have control of and the ServiceWorker I have control of.