- From: David Singer <singer@apple.com>
- Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2017 15:52:22 -0700
- To: Sean McBeth <sean.mcbeth@primrosevr.com>
- Cc: John Foliot <john.foliot@deque.com>, Brandon Jones <bajones@google.com>, "Bassbouss, Louay" <louay.bassbouss@fokus.fraunhofer.de>, "public-webvr@w3.org" <public-webvr@w3.org>, Klaus Weidner <klausw@google.com>, "Pham, Stefan" <stefan.pham@fokus.fraunhofer.de>, Florian Bösch <pyalot@gmail.com>
> On Jul 12, 2017, at 14:37 , Sean McBeth <sean.mcbeth@primrosevr.com> wrote: > > 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. Indeed, I agree that there are technical questions in here, and one of the tricky ones would be designing the VR part of the system so that it can be configured ‘downstream’ of the video decoding, but can’t be used to ‘grab’ the video. I have no idea whether that will be tricky or trivial, as these are early days. And the point of my question about use-cases for VR was to try to work out — is it worth it? My current guess is that VR will not be used for professionally-generated content very much. What film director wants his viewers choosing their own point of view or camera angles? It’s perhaps more likely that VR will be used for personal content, whereupon it’s not so much a concern. I do think that making sure that timestamps are respected for final rendering is important, to ensure audio/video sync. This is nothing to do with DRM, but to do with anything that does post-transformations (after decode) on media. (This came up in frame-packed stereo views, for example). David Singer Manager, Software Standards, Apple Inc.
Received on Wednesday, 12 July 2017 22:52:50 UTC