- From: Emmanuel Revah <stsil@manurevah.com>
- Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2013 10:57:31 +0200
- To: public-restrictedmedia@w3.org
On 2013/10/10 20:05, David Singer wrote: > On Oct 10, 2013, at 3:42 , Emmanuel Revah <stsil@manurevah.com> wrote: > >> >> Flash has been around for over a decade, almost every browser had it >> installed at some point. It was never part of the W3C spec. Same for >> other plugins. > > But the object and embed tags, which enabled it, were. They stand in > almost exactly the same place as the EME APIs, except the EME APIs are > much more circumscribed in what the external plug-in can do (which is > an advantage). > > David Singer > Multimedia and Software Standards, Apple Inc. Good point, except that embed is simply a spot to include any non-HTML/standard elements. It can be Flash or anything else (open or closed, obfuscated or clear), it's just a way of inserting "anything non-standard" in a standard way. EME is like embed, except that it is itself a mechanism to restrict and control usage of standard HTML elements. It's only purpose is to give the publisher control over the user's browser. EME exists only for the DRM. I'm not sure that's a good thing, but let's say that's more of opinion territory, the fact part is that EME clearly says DRM is a good for the "Open Web". -- Emmanuel Revah http://manurevah.com
Received on Friday, 11 October 2013 08:58:03 UTC