W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > April 2012

Re: CfC: Create Media Task Force

From: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2012 10:22:48 +1000
Message-ID: <CAHp8n2=5Ex-griBDu+dqmPz5UVARWWyfn6OyZizxPtvi6eK9ww@mail.gmail.com>
To: Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com>
Cc: "<robert@ocallahan.org>" <robert@ocallahan.org>, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
On Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at 6:42 AM, Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com> wrote:
>
> On Apr 19, 2012, at 4:50 PM, Robert O'Callahan wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 7:15 AM, Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Apr 17, 2012, at 9:01 PM, Robert O'Callahan wrote:
>>>
>>> Why can't all CDMs be specified/documented?
>>
>>
>> I suppose Microsoft/Google/Apple could answer for why they have not or
>> will not publish the PlayReady/Widevine/Fairplay specifications.
>
>
> Sorry, we're miscommunicating. I'm not asking that those DRM systems be
> completely specified or documented. I'm only asking that the interface
> between those systems and the browser be specified or documented, so that
> anyone writing a browser for a system where one of those products is present
> can implement the CDM for that product.
>
>
> Ah, ok. Well, I completely agree with that goal.
>
> One approach would be to encourage the DRM vendors to publish their existing
> APIs. Another would be to work together on a common API which is sufficient
> to hook up a DRM component to the proposed HTML5 extensions and get multiple
> DRM vendors to expose that API. This second API would likely be simpler than
> the existing vendor-specific APIs. And it would be simpler to see how to
> connect it to the HTML5 extensions. At Netflix we have such an API which we
> use for integration with a wide variety of systems. I will see if we can
> publish that.
>
> The only thing I am unsure about is how much of the above could/should be
> done in a W3C context and how much is about companies working together
> outside W3C ?

I think such an API should be a core part of the Encryption API that
is being proposed. Thus, I would like to see this API being developed
as part of the work of the task force.

This whole thread has been very instructive for the collection of
scope and deliverables of the TF. I'd like to see these included into
the list of "principles" laid out for the task force before we
proceed.

Regards,
Silvia.
Received on Saturday, 21 April 2012 00:23:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:31 UTC