- From: Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com>
- Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2013 07:22:54 -0700
- To: Duncan Bayne <dhgbayne@fastmail.fm>
- Cc: John Foliot <john@foliot.ca>, "public-restrictedmedia@w3.org" <public-restrictedmedia@w3.org>
Sent from my iPhone On Jun 10, 2013, at 8:45 PM, Duncan Bayne <dhgbayne@fastmail.fm> wrote: >> 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? Without accepting that the latter scenario sacrifices any principles, your assumption is that the only difference is the imprimatur of the W3C on the EME specification. If the role of the W3C was merely to decide on what should and should not be allowed on the open web, and grant the former its imprimatur, then given TimBLs statements about 'not needing permission' I'm afraid he would simply disappear in a puff of logic, which would be sad. No, there is some value to the W3C *process*. The EME in your two scenarios is not the same EME. The fragmentation is not so great. The proprietary blobs are not unconstrained and unknown but thoughtfully vetted and integrated by UA implementors. The privacy, security and accessibility issues are more thoroughly investigated and as a result users are better informed before they choose to use a CDM. Efforts have been made to avoid leaving out Firefox altogether. There are open bugs for these things, meaning that the specification cannot become a Recommendation without addressing them. It can, however, become an ad hoc industry standard without any attention to any of these things. ...Mark > > -- > 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 14:23:25 UTC