- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2010 14:05:30 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10902 --- Comment #41 from Shelley Powers <shelleyp@burningbird.net> 2010-10-13 14:05:23 UTC --- (In reply to comment #40) > (In reply to comment #39) > > > In any case, this is something for browsers > > > actually supporting DRM to figure out. > > > > how? > > > > serious question, incidentally: as an author, this suggestion would appear to > > be that I file a ER against WebKit asking for "a means to determine that a > > particular DRM scheme is supported", and do the same for (say) IE, wait several > > years, and then come back to the HTML WG and say "well, WebKit now does this, > > IE does this, Gecko doesn't support any DRM, some embedded deployments of Opera > > do, but don't have a way to detect it, can we reach some consensus and maybe > > stick something in the spec?" > > Yes, this is pretty much how I expect it to work. Given the lack of input from > browsers that want to support DRM, standardizing anything right now would be > premature. It's better if those who understand (and care about) the issues > solve them. Please don't take offense at this, but this almost seems like you're saying that we should just wait until the browsers determine what we should have, and then they'll let us add this to a future version of HTML. I definitely think that one of the key aspects of the success of the video element is allowing those who want to use the element the ability to restrict access to the video, and one way to do so is some form of DRM. We may not like it, but it is a reality. If there are technical reasons why we can't incorporate at least a framework into HTML5 that accounts for DRM, we should focus on these technicalities. But I don't consider "browsers don't currently support it, or don't like it" to be such a technicality. Remember, HTML isn't only consumed by browsers. And browsers aren't the only gatekeeper for the spec. However, I think that Aryeh's point is good: we can't expect the discussion to focus on technicalities if we don't start with technicalities. Bugs about DRM should be about specific changes. Bugs are not a particularly good place to have general discussions. Unfortunately, with the HTML WG procedures, I'm not sure what other venue is available for these discussions to take place. -- Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Wednesday, 13 October 2010 14:05:36 UTC