On Apr 16, at 11:21 AM, Glenn Adams wrote: > On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 2:33 AM, Andreas Kuckartz <A.Kuckartz@ping.de> wrote: > Netflix now publicly writes about "The W3C Encrypted Media Extensions > specification": > http://techblog.netflix.com/2013/04/html5-video-at-netflix.html > > I think that this is inappropriate / incorrect. The EME document is only > an Editor's Draft and Netflix knows that there was and is not even > consensus to publish it as a First Public Working Draft (FPWD). > > That's because IT IS a W3C specification. The phrase "W3C specification" is widely used to refer to a document being developed in the W3C for possibly eventual publishing. It implies nothing about the status of the document. You have been told this before, so I'm not sure what your point is. If it’s a matter of semantic misunderstanding and not a conscious effort to frame this as adhering to an established standard, perhaps some text should be added to the post clarifying that the EME extension specification is not currently proceeding along any standards track? It certainly reads that way to me, as I’m sure it will to a number of readers who aren’t following the topic closely—it may come across as misleading. -Mat
Received on Tuesday, 16 April 2013 15:33:37 UTC