- From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@hsivonen.fi>
- Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2013 18:19:45 +0300
- To: "public-restrictedmedia@w3.org" <public-restrictedmedia@w3.org>
On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 5:12 PM, Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com> wrote: > But they are, and will continue to be, through <object>. Or is > <object> something defined by W3C but not part of the 'open web' (as > you define it) ? The argumentation around "Open Web" is really weird when it comes to EME. I think the part of the Web that requires a CDM that's not independently (without permission) interoperably implementable to work should not be considered to be part of the "Open Web" just like the part of the Web that requires an NPAPI/ActiveX plug-in shouldn't be considered part of the "Open Web". (I'm taking it as obvious that the term "Open Web" arose as a shorthand for "not Flash" but the sentiment really was using the stuff that browser engines themselves independently interoperably implement.) -- Henri Sivonen hsivonen@hsivonen.fi http://hsivonen.fi/
Received on Friday, 18 October 2013 15:20:16 UTC