- From: L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org>
- Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 12:17:25 -0800
- To: public-html-admin@w3.org
On Thursday 2013-01-24 08:19 -0500, Philippe Le Hegaret wrote: > 1. HTML5 does not require specific image, audio, caption, or video > formats. It is format agnostic and there is a desire in the Working > Group to keep it that way. While there are certainly individuals in the working group who want to keep it that way, I don't think there's anything close to working group consensus to keep it that way. There are certainly arguments on both sides. From a technical perspective, there's definitely value in having pieces be orthogonal, and particularly in avoiding dependencies on a particular version of a technology rather than the latest version of a technology. However, from a policy perspective any extension point is a loophole that allows us to lose any or all of the benefits of the W3C's process or other open standards processes, such as having publicly available specifications that allow anyone to implement the technology [1]. The existing extension points you reference (image, audio, caption, and video formats) are used to refer to existing technologies with publicly available specifications. The reason for particular concern in this case is that there appears to be a significant risk that this will not be the case for Content Decryption Modules (CDMs). In other words, I support Robert O'Callahan's objection to the publication of EME. -David [1] Also see item 4 in http://open-stand.org/principles/ which is endorsed by W3C at http://open-stand.org/affirmation/ . -- 𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂 𝄢 Mozilla http://www.mozilla.org/ 𝄂
Received on Thursday, 31 January 2013 20:17:49 UTC