Re: W3C mock's users [via Restricted Media Community Group]

I wouldn't hace ever dreamed about stating that sentence, but today one may
never know. Anyway, a I retire it.
El 20/08/2013 03:29, "Jeff Jaffe" <jeff@w3.org> escribió:

> On 8/19/2013 9:23 PM, Mhyst wrote:
>
>> He was trying to brief me the whole thing... which I appreciate.
>> The basic thing is like he said, isn't it?
>>
>> Now if I ask you, Jeff, how much money do they pay (the interested
>> companies, obviously) you for allowing this nonsense... would you
>> consider offensive as well?
>>
>
> Certainly, that question is at least uninformed.
>
> Members of W3C pay according to a well defined schedule which gives them
> full Membership privileges.  No extra money has been paid for anything
> related to EME.
>
> W3C Director, Tim Berners-Lee decides on the scope of Working Groups.  I
> find it pretty offensive that someone would suggest that he makes these
> decisions based on money paid.  His decision to make the web open; rather
> than used for his proprietary advantage certainly disproves your theory.
>
>
>> Well, I don't pretend to insult you. Not at all. I just try to
>> understand how things went this way. That's all.
>>
>> In my opinion, there should be a previous consensus before starting to
>> consider the best way to implement (define) EME.
>> I'm here just two days and I don't see that so called consensus about
>> the matter. So why are we supposed to talk about the better approaches
>> to define EME?
>>
>>
>