- From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 18:58:24 -0500
- To: robert@ocallahan.org
- CC: public-html-admin@w3.org
On 01/30/2013 05:13 PM, Robert O'Callahan wrote: > On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 2:40 PM, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net > <mailto:rubys@intertwingly.net>> wrote: > > Meanwhile, is there any way that you could sketch out the beginnings > of what could form the foundation for a concrete proposal that would > address your issue? > > > Here's what I have sketched out so far in my previous messages: > 1) Require CDMs used with EME to be registered in a central registry. > 2) To be registered, a CDM must be accompanied by > documentation/specification that enables user-agents and content > providers to interoperate with the CDM to the maximum extent possible. > > I've been thinking about requirement #2 a bit. Here is a proposed > documentation requirement: > Documentation should describe the complete operation of the CDM, in > enough detail to enable independent implementation in user-agents and to > enable content deployment by content providers, except for some set of > secret keys whose values may be withheld. > > I believe HDCP for example already meets this bar --- and is widely > deployed to a critical component of DRM for HD content --- so I think > it's a reasonable requirement for a DRM system that we would bless as > part of the Web platform. Can I impose upon you to open bug reports on these two items? component=Encrypted+Media+Extensions - Sam Ruby
Received on Wednesday, 30 January 2013 23:58:47 UTC