W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > December 2007

Re: Video codec requirements changed

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2007 02:23:43 +0000 (UTC)
To: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>
Cc: public-html@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0712120223180.7107@hixie.dreamhostps.com>

On Tue, 11 Dec 2007, L. David Baron wrote:
> 
> The text you replaced the requirements with [1] includes the
> requirement that the codec:
> 
> # is not an additional submarine patent risk for large companies
> 
> Is this something that can be measured objectively, or is it a
> loophole that allows any sufficiently large company to veto the
> choice of codec for any reason it chooses, potentially including not
> wanting the <video> element to succeed in creating an open standard
> for video on the Web?

Neither, but that doesn't really matter. With any feature in the spec,
implementors have veto choice. All it takes is for an implementor that
is otherwise intending to implement the bulk of the specification to say
"we won't implement this bit" for that bit to be vetoed. The idea is to
get full interop, if someone won't implement a part of it, we won't get
interop.

(If an implementor refuses to implement the bulk of the specification, of
course, their credibility starts taking a hit, and it becomes worth just
calling the implementor's bluff.)

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Wednesday, 12 December 2007 02:23:56 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:16:11 GMT