Re: Registration of CDMs as a solution proposal (was Re: "Revealed: how Microsoft...")

On Fri, 2013-07-12 at 14:31 -0700, Mark Watson wrote:
> 
> 
> On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 1:46 PM, Norbert Bollow <nb@bollow.ch> wrote:
>         "piranna@gmail.com" <piranna@gmail.com> wrote:
>         
>         > > Robert O'Callaghan of Mozilla proposed that all CDMs be
>         registered
>         > > and that a condition of registration be publication of the
>         source
>         > > code
>         >
>         > Interesting solution... Independently of the fact I'm
>         against EME,
>         > since this would mean a reduced and clearly common set of
>         CDMs, I
>         > agree with that solution.
>         
>         +1
>         
>         since it would also greatly increase the likelihood of being
>         able to
>         run the CDMs on Free Software operating system platforms,
>         therefore
>         significantly reducing the risk in regard to the continued
>         viability
>         of such operating system platforms that I'm so concerned
>         about.
> 
> 
> I see, so this is an area where there could be some advantage to
> working on this in W3C then ?

Just a clarification. You wrote:
"all CDMs be registered and that a condition of registration be
publication of the source code"

Robert says on this bug:
"Documentation must be published describing the complete operation of
the CDM"

Those are two different things. Am I missing something?


Andreas' suggestion on this same bug is also interesting
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20944#c14

Received on Saturday, 13 July 2013 08:24:25 UTC