Re: Please, reject the EME proposal

On 05/13/2013 11:26 AM, piranna@gmail.com wrote:
> I agree, EME should be discussed on only one list, both for development
> and criticism.

If you wish to debate the W3C decision that "content protection" is in 
scope, please follow Paul's advice.

Until or unless that decision is changed, the chairs are committed to 
creating an environment where those that wish to work on EME -- or even 
on alternatives to EME -- can do so without interference.

More specifically, if the primary "contribution" of your email consists 
of "it seems to me that DRM was a bad idea", then such emails do not 
belong here.

- Sam Ruby

> El 13/05/2013 17:24, "Emmanuel Revah" <stsil@manurevah.com
> <mailto:stsil@manurevah.com>> escribió:
>
>     On 2013/05/13 16:49, Paul Cotton wrote:
>
>         Please take this discussion to a more appropriate forum such as
>         http://www.w3.org/community/__restrictedmedia/
>         <http://www.w3.org/community/restrictedmedia/>
>
>
>     Hi Paul,
>
>
>     I'm interested in hearing why certain topics related to EME are
>     welcome here and others not. I've searched but not found any
>     specific guildines for what should be discussed in
>     public-html-media, please do post me a link or further details if I
>     have missed it.
>
>     I have subscribed to
>     http://lists.w3.org/Archives/__Public/public-restrictedmedia/
>     <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-restrictedmedia/> as you
>     suggested. I just hope it's not a list intended to isolate unwanted
>     criticism of EME from other lists.
>
>
>     --
>     Emmanuel Revah
>
>
>

Received on Monday, 13 May 2013 15:38:46 UTC