W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > March 2012

Re: Encrypted Media proposal: Summary of the discussion so far

From: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2012 19:03:03 +1100
Message-Id: <D9CA8040-AC6C-4BC4-9AC5-631DBE6EAF7B@gmail.com>
Cc: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com>, Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>, Charles Pritchard <chuck@jumis.com>, David Dorwin <ddorwin@google.com>, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>, "<public-html@w3.org>" <public-html@w3.org>
To: Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis <bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com>
Captions from a track element would be displayed even if the player has no controls attribute IIRC. You get that for free in html5 (once implemented) burnout from a flash canvas.


On 16/03/2012, at 6:33 PM, Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis <bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 10:23 AM, Steve Faulkner
> <faulkner.steve@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Removing the flash dependency would result in native capabilities for
>> interacting with media built in to the browser.
>> For example, in Firefox both the audio and video elements default controls
>> can be operated using the keyboard.
>> The controls while not represented in the DOM are represented in the
>> accessibility tree so that assistive technology can provide access to users
>> This is not the case with Flash on non windows platfroms..
> [snip]
>> Note: this is not an argument for or against CDM's, it's an argument for
>> providing use of native HTML5 video and audio over embedded inaccessible
>> functionality.
> We are providing that through the <video> element and a Fullscreen API.
> The sort of DRM-dependent video sites we're talking about typically do
> not practice progressive enhancement (relying on JS being enabled) and
> build their own chrome to control, brand, and monetise the user
> experience, so I suspect users will not benefit from the accessibility
> of the default controls for their content.
> Out of YouTube, Hulu, BBC IPlayer, Daily Motion, MetaCafe, and Yahoo!
> Screen only in MetaCafe and Yahoo! Screen can you even play videos
> with JS off, and MetaCafe's thumbnails are not loaded. They all build
> their own chrome and it's not clear they'd be happy to surface videos
> without it. (For example, how would they play an ad before the
> video…).
> Such sites could provide the accessibility controls you describe by
> using Flash as a non-interactive canvas, including in fullscreen as
> browsers adopt:
> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/fullscreen/raw-file/tip/Overview.html
> The DRM proposal under discussion won't even promote progressive
> enhancement, since it introduces a dependency on a JS API.
> In summary, I'm not convinced the DRM proposal will translate into
> significant accessibility improvements. I'd prefer browsers put their
> efforts into fullscreen support.
> --
> Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis
Received on Friday, 16 March 2012 08:05:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:16:21 UTC