Re: Netflix HTML5 player in IE 11 on Windows 8.1

> Perhaps I should be clearer here: stopping this technology is what
> stand's the snowball's chance. You might stand a slim chance of halting this work
> at the W3C, *but it won't stop the work*, something that has also been
> repeated numerous times. 

100% in agreement there.  Hell, I'm still providing commercial support
to customers of a DRM system I built and sold.  DRM will live on for as
long as people perceive a need for it.

> This is the unvarnished truth,
> and failing to accept that is (it appears to me) the source of much of
> your frustration. 

Not in my case.  I'm 100% understanding of the fact that work on DRM
(and probably EME as it's actually a good design) will go on outside the
W3C.  In my case, the value comes from the neener, neener, boop part: by
refusing to work on DRM, the W3C will uphold its mission and principles.

As I've said before, those who want DRM can go and build it.  A
DRM-specific industry consortium might be a reasonable starting point.

> Why should the W3C shun those who wish to work on *a* technical
> solution, using W3C process, the ability to do so inside of the W3C, when
> there is no emergent alternative within or even outside of the W3C, and
> work
> on these efforts will happen with or without W3C "blessing"?

Because principles are important.  The Open Web is important.  More
important than any individual technology or company.

> I don't want to appear glib, as this is in fact a serious and legitimate
> question. 
> 
> Sadly, on this topic, I don't think there was ever a time. 

Neither do I, and neither do others with an interest in the Open Web. 
That's what makes us angry - and / or sad - in equal measure.

-- 
Duncan Bayne
ph: +61 420817082 | web: http://duncan-bayne.github.com/ | skype:
duncan_bayne

I usually check my mail every 24 - 48 hours.  If there's something
urgent going on, please send me an SMS or call me at the above number.

Received on Saturday, 6 July 2013 03:19:42 UTC