- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2013 19:37:53 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=21741 Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |glenn@skynav.com --- Comment #1 from Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com> --- So, if I understand your description, one has the following options: (1) a/v tracks are encrypted and some CDM-1 would decrypt (2) t/t tracks may be: a. included in the container containing a/v tracks, and those t/t are also encrypted according to CDM-1 b. included in the container containing a/v tracks, but those t/t are not encrypted c. not included in the a/v container, and encrypted using an encryption according to CDM-2 d. not included in the a/v container, and not encrypted You are expressing concern about support for (2)c, yes? How likely is it that (2)c would apply instead of 2(d)? I would not expect producers and distributors of accessibility enhancements to use encryption at all, especially when they are a 3rd party, but I agree it can't be ruled out. Is my interpretation correct? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Thursday, 18 April 2013 19:37:54 UTC