I think Florian has made a very good case for why his arguments (which I share) *are* technical arguments. It is certainly no more political than HTTPS everywhere and requiring secure origins for WebVR, which Google and Mozilla decided in their infinite wisdom for us. On Jul 12, 2017 4:59 PM, "John Foliot" <john.foliot@deque.com> wrote: Am I the only one following this thread who finds it ironic that the man who wants the W3C to not discuss technical issues around WebVR and DRM is also the man who has contributed more engineering discussion on this thread than anyone else? Florian, we all (or, at least, *I*) understand your philosophical stand around Premium Content protection, but at the end of the day it remains a legal activity, and that legal activity brings with it technical challenges and questions. That is what the the W3C should remain focused on, the technical discussions, and leave the politicking to the politicians. Peace out. JF On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 3:33 PM, Florian Bösch <pyalot@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 10:19 PM, Klaus Weidner <klausw@google.com> wrote: >> >> That would be a change to the (as yet hypothetical) protected compositing >> context implementation in the browser. >> > > Like I said. A retardation of the programmable pipeline lacking anything > the UA doesn't put in, which will be most things. Unless you want to > include a bycantean fixed-function API with a pleathora of options, it's in > no an adequate replacement for a programmable pipeline. This will show in > applications. There's very solid reasons why we're doing programmable > pipelines now, and don't have fixed-function pipelines anymore. > -- John Foliot Principal Accessibility Strategist Deque Systems Inc. john.foliot@deque.com Advancing the mission of digital accessibility and inclusion
Received on Wednesday, 12 July 2017 21:38:06 UTC