W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-media@w3.org > April 2013

RE: EME Bugs filed after CfC decision and before Feb 15

From: Fred Andrews <fredandw@live.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2013 04:32:29 +0000
Message-ID: <BLU156-W50E9A4D32710AF79D2FB32AAB70@phx.gbl>
To: Paul Cotton <paul.cotton@microsoft.com>, "public-html-media@w3.org" <public-html-media@w3.org>
For the record I will note that the state of these bugs is a largely
the result of the lone actions of a subgroup and that there was
no consensus on the actions taken.  I stopped reopening the
bugs because this subgroup kept acting in bad faith to prevent
the work proceeding and marking the bugs closed.  In may
cases this subgroup just refused to undertake the work or
applied their subjective option on the matters.  Even bugs
with work to clarify the use cases, requirements, and
definitions, were closed in bad faith.  This subgroup even
called for others to take their work elsewhere showing
a complete contempt for the consensus process.

Further, I would note that this sub group made no formal
objection to the lack of consensus.  The state of most of
these bugs remains disputed.  The state of the EME remains
disputed and unresolved.  The current editors draft is not
the real EME, just a publication of this subgroup.

Given that there is no consensus on the content of the
EME, the push by the Chairs to proceed with the CfC
appears to be an act of bad faith and raises confidence
concerns.

Further I dispute the judgement of the Chairs in narrowing
the terms under which the next CfC will be assessed.
The W3C made some declaration that the work of the EME
was in scope, by the EME does not even define the use
cases and requirements in an objective manner so this
directive is little more than an indication to keep working
on the draft and to build more consensus.   The direction
set by the Chairs appears biased towards the goals of
their organizations at the expense of the wider interests
of the group.  Given their conflict of interest the Chairs
should have abstained from decision making in this
matters.  I am left with little confidence in the Chairs.

cheers
Fred

From: Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com
To: public-html-media@w3.org
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2013 19:55:39 +0000
Subject: EME Bugs filed after CfC decision and before Feb 15









When there were objections to the first FPWD CfC for EME the Chairs issued a email about the lack of consensus:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-admin/2013Feb/0123.html
that requested:
 
“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.”
 
At several Feb EME Media TF meetings we processed the bugs that were filed after the FPWD CfC and before Feb 15.  I have recorded below how the Editors and TF processed these bugs and notes there current status.  I am hoping that this record
 will help us process this at the current HTML WG F2F meeting.
 
EME Bugs filed after CfC and before Feb 15:
 
1) Bug 20944 EME should do more to encourage/ensure CDM-level interop, and can be different per-user/device.
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20944

Status: OPEN and item added to SOTD to describe this bug. 

 
2) Bug 20960 EME is not limited to video.
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20960

Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20960#c12

 
3) Bug 20961 EME depends on privileged access to the users computer which is not technically available.

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20961

Status: RESOVLED WONTFIX
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20961#c8

 
4) Bug 20962 EME depends on patented technology. 
 https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20962  
 Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20962#c4
 
5) Bug 20963 EME is technically incomplete 
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20963
Status: RESOLVED NEEDSINFO and then REOPENED with no new information
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20963#c14

 
6) Bug 20964 EME depends on servers with a finite life.
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20964

Status: RESOLVED WORKSFORME
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20964#c28

 
7) Bug 20965 EME results in a loss of control over security and privacy.

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20965  
Status: OPEN and item added to SOTD to describe this bug and then RE-OPENED
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20965#c29

 
8) Bug 20966 EME design trivializes the demanded loss of control of security and privacy demanded.

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20966
Status: Open and item added to SOTD to describe this bug and then RE-OPENED
OPEN and item added to SOTD to describe this bug 
 
9) Bug 20967 EME does not allow independent implementation, excluding open source implementations.

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20967

Status: RESOLVED NEEDSINFO
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20967#c5

 
10) Bug 20968 EME depends on legal sanctions to succeed and this is not a matter that can be addressed here.

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20968

Status: RESOLVED WORKSFORME
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20968#c5

 
11) Bug 20978 Just an API for encouraging the use of proprietary plugins

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20978
Status: RESOLVES WONTFIX
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20978#c2

 
12) Bug 20992 EME should define or reference a platform-independent VM in which CDMs will run

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20992

Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 20944
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20992#c3

 
13) Bug 21016 Please split Clear Key into a separate optional specification
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=21016  
Status: RESOLVED LATER
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=21016#c2

 
/paulc
  
Paul Cotton, Microsoft Canada
17 Eleanor Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K2E 6A3
Tel: (425) 705-9596 Fax: (425) 936-7329
 
 		 	   		  
Received on Friday, 26 April 2013 04:32:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:32:59 UTC