Re: CfC: to publish Encrypted Media Extensions specification as a First Public Working Draft (FPWD)

On Feb 10, 2013, at 9:55 PM, Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org> wrote:

> Sam Ruby wrote: 
> Examining the objections related to the question as to whether the 
> candidate FPWD contains enough information to be implemented 
> interoperably, the chairs found that much of the input on this has 
> lacked specifics, so at this time we are putting out a call for clear 
> and specific bug reports to be filed against the Encrypted Media 
> Extensions component in bugzilla[1] by February 15th.  Once that is 
> complete, we will seek an recommendation by the EME editors on how to 
> proceed with these bugs.
> 
> I'm not sure that taking discussion off-list into a bug is a good idea, but I filed https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20944 as requested. If it's not clear and specific enough, please explain why so I can fix it.
> 
> There may be some questions/objections regarding the bug. Should I preemptively address them in the bug, or in an email, or will there be a chance to address them when/if they are made by the EME editors?

It's fine to continue discussion of the bug proposal in email, though it should probably be on a technical list rather than on public-html-admin. I would recommend a new thread on public-html-media for email discussion. I think it's usually a good idea to provide more info pre-emptively (either in a bug or in email) but it's also ok to wait to see what questions are actually asked.

Regards,
Maciej