On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 4:59 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>wrote: > On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 3:57 PM, Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 4:06 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> > > wrote: > >> So, why are we even arguing about this again? > > > > Because you keep making "moral" arguments against a technical solution > to a > > technical problem that a substantial number of W3C members believe > exists in > > the real world and that warrants being addressed. > > Out of a large email filled with a substantial technical argument > about the relative benefit of implementing this versus the status quo, > and comparing it to other features and the way we evaluate whether to > include them in the web, you decide to quote that one line, and then > respond with a non sequitur. > I don't recognize any of your arguments as technical, nor do I recognize your comparison about cost/benefit as having a technical or substantive basis. You cite no methodology for evaluating proposals for new features, you offer no metrics that demonstrate excessive cost or lack of benefit. You cite no established policies or recognized precedents from which guidance could be obtained. You merely repeat your opinion ad infinitum that EME is DRM, DRM is evil, and therefore EME is evil. We've heard that argument, and though there may be some who are persuaded by it, we are not. So why keep repeating it? Yes, that is a good question.
Received on Saturday, 26 January 2013 00:17:16 UTC