- From: Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com>
- Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2016 00:38:33 -0700
- To: David Dorwin <ddorwin@google.com>
- Cc: public-hme-editors@w3.org
- Message-ID: <CAEnTvdBuC4RGwPkxckdM4ofMT9wdaEypjus7n-zm-Myfsa45BA@mail.gmail.com>
That's good. Which DRM vendors will be a able to stand up test servers for the period whilst we prepare the implementation report ? (I don't think we can test the whole specification with ClearKey alone). The tests I am working on will have a simple abstract interface to plug in different server protocols on the client side. I also wonder whether it might be acceptable for the purpose of the implementation report to have some browser-specific polyfill code that patches up any small non-compliances ? We would still be testing the "true" EME API, just an implementation of it that consists of a browser + polyfill. This seems to me to meet the requirement for demonstrating specification correctness, at least. What do you think ? ...Mark On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 1:41 PM, David Dorwin <ddorwin@google.com> wrote: > Great! I'll create a PR for the Blink tests early next week. > > On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 1:38 PM, Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com> wrote: > >> FYI: I started work on the IDL tests. I will put them here >> <https://github.com/mwatson2/web-platform-tests>, encrypted-media branch. >> >> I am also going to look as porting our simple EME tests across to the >> web-platform-tests framework. >> >> ...Mark >> >> >
Received on Tuesday, 14 June 2016 07:39:02 UTC