- From: Duncan Bayne <dhgbayne@fastmail.fm>
- Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2013 20:45:22 -0700
- To: John Foliot <john@foliot.ca>, Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com>
- Cc: public-restrictedmedia@w3.org
> EME will remain outside of the one place where it > stood to at least have something of a public review, and public feedback. > > Progress in the name of "Openness". Okay, let's say you're right. Then, the two alternatives are: - A fragmented landscape, with some content protected by proprietary closed-source blobs. Users of non-mainstream OSs (GNU/Linux, Firefox OS) won't be able to access some or any of that content. The interface between the browser and said proprietary closed-source blobs is an ad-hoc industry standard. vs. - A fragmented landscape, with some content protected by proprietary closed-source blobs. Users of non-mainstream OSs (GNU/Linux, Firefox OS) won't be able to access some or any of that content. The interface between the browser and said proprietary closed-source blobs is a W3C recommendation. How, exactly, is the latter scenario worth sacrificing the principles of the Open Web? -- Duncan Bayne ph: +61 420817082 | web: http://duncan-bayne.github.com/ | skype: duncan_bayne I usually check my mail every 24 - 48 hours. If there's something urgent going on, please send me an SMS or call me at the above number.
Received on Tuesday, 11 June 2013 03:45:44 UTC