- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2013 13:20:05 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17673 --- Comment #15 from Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@hsivonen.fi> --- (In reply to comment #14) > It appears that trying to support any scheme type (not just CENC) has led us > to include the entire |sinf| box along with |pssh| boxes. This may be adding > complexity and overhead that are otherwise unnecessary. What's the use case for non-CENC schemes? Since the interoperability story of EME hinges on CENC, supporting non-CENC schemes looks like an avenue for vendor lock-in. > If we returned to just reporting |pssh| boxes, we could always fire a > needkey event with the |pssh| What's the use case for exposing even pssh? It, too, looks like an avenue for defeating the interop story of EME by introducing vendor lock-in. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 13 August 2013 13:20:14 UTC