RE: Proposal: Internet Encrypted Media Extensions

> Subject: Re: Proposal: Internet Encrypted Media Extensions
> From: singer@apple.com
> Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2014 16:30:07 -0800
> CC: watsonm@netflix.com; public-restrictedmedia@w3.org
> To: fredandw@live.com
> 
> I still don’t understand what you are proposing.
> 
> Is it (a) that the DRM and media decoding be done in a separate application?

Yes. Or if the user chooses, a separate device.

> (b) that the entire UI and exchange with the server be done in a separate application?

The media player UI is a matter for the media player vendor and is chosen by the user.

The media player UI is not exposed to the web developer.

The media player's entire exchange with the server is done in a separate application or device.

The web interface runs in the separate web browser.

> (c) that something is built that looks like a ‘restricted browser’ but that has all the functionalities of a regular one?

Certainly not.  A web browser is not exposed to the web developer via the media player, only via the separate web browser.

The media player may well be implemented in a web browser, but the web app would be chosen by the user, and there would be a reference app that conforming content must play in.  The web developer would not have access this web browser, apart from the media stream.
 
> I think you may be unaware of the W3C’s initiative to try to level the playing field, where appropriate, with native apps.  They are eroding the open, interlinked web, in some people’s eyes.  By asking for a separate native app, you are asking to go the other way.  It feels as though you are trying to build a silo, where others are trying to take it down.

Keeping DRM out of the open web, and out of peoples general purpose computers, has many advantages for users, including security.

> The advantages of using the browser as the UI engine for watching media are legion.  Not least,

> (a) linkability to to the media and its support resources etc.

The IEME proposal could use a URL to link to the content.

> (b) accessibility using the web platform

The IEME proposal would add a general mechanism to redirect content to the separate media player making it very accessible from the web platform.

> (c) client-side configurability (e.g. user style sheets).  I am sure there are more.

The IEME proposal has much better support for user choice over the media player.  The user can use their chosen player to view all content, and do not need to use separate client side configurations for each web developers player.  There is nothing preventing the media player controls using HTML, but this is not exposed to the web developer.

cheers
Fred