- From: Giuseppe Pascale <giuseppep@opera.com>
- Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 16:22:09 +0100
- To: "public-web-and-tv@w3.org WG" <public-web-and-tv@w3.org>
People not on the HTML list can follow the discussion via the public archive: http://www.w3.org/mid/6895C7B67488C14AA23F0E079F0D7E8F3848F0@TK5EX14MBXC283.redmond.corp.microsoft.com /g On Wed, 22 Feb 2012 03:59:39 +0100, Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com> wrote: > All, > > Please see the proposal below, which supersedes the previous Netflix > proposal on Content Protection in HTML. > > Regards, > > Mark Watson > > Begin forwarded message: > > From: Adrian Bateman > <adrianba@microsoft.com<mailto:adrianba@microsoft.com>> > Date: February 21, 2012 3:16:42 PM PST > To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com<mailto:mjs@apple.com>>, "HTML WG > (public-html@w3.org<mailto:public-html@w3.org>)" > <public-html@w3.org<mailto:public-html@w3.org>> > Cc: David Dorwin <ddorwin@google.com<mailto:ddorwin@google.com>>, Mark > Watson <watsonm@netflix.com<mailto:watsonm@netflix.com>> > Subject: Encrypted Media proposal (was RE: ISSUE-179: av_param - Chairs > Solicit Alternate Proposals or Counter-Proposals) > > Hi all, > > We have been collaborating on an API to enable encrypted media in HTML > that we think > can be implemented in all browsers and support any container/codec and > content > encryption solution without making major changes to the HTML Media > element > specification. We think it solves most use cases without being overly > large or > complex. > > We'd like to get people's feedback on the proposal. It is posted here: > http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/html-media/raw-file/tip/encrypted-media/encrypted-media.html > > Many content providers and application developers have said they can't > use <audio> > and <video> because HTML lacks robust content protection. Without this > functionality, > they cannot move their apps to the web platform. Many consumer > electronics are taking > advantage of HTML for both video playback and user interfaces, yet their > content > protection solutions are typically tied to the device. We believe that > working > towards a common solution will reduce fragmentation between all HTML > platforms. > > This has been raised in the Web & TV Interest Group [1] and mentioned in > their > feedback [2]. We believe this extension specification supports the > counter proposal [3] > for ISSUE-179 [4]. It demonstrates how to provide additional > functionality to the > HTML5 media element without requiring a generic mechanism like <param>. > > Best regards, > > David Dorwin, Google > Adrian Bateman, Microsoft > Mark Watson, Netflix > > [1] http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/MPTF#Content_Protection > [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2011Dec/0120.html > [2] http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/issue-179_no_change > [3] http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/179 > > On Wednesday, January 11, 2012 11:40 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote: > '{audio,video} require param child (or equivalent)' > The current status for this issue: > > http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/179 > http://dev.w3.org/html5/status/issue-status.html#ISSUE-179 > > So far, we two one Change Proposals submitted: > > http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/av_param > http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/issue-179_no_change > > At this time the Chairs would also like to solicit additional Change > Proposals, in case anyone would like to advocate the status quo or a > different change than the specific ones in the existing Change Proposals. > > If no counter-proposals or alternate proposals are received by February > 11th, > 2012, we proceed to evaluate the change proposals that we have received > to > date. > > Regards, > Maciej > > > > -- Giuseppe Pascale TV & Connected Devices Opera Software
Received on Wednesday, 22 February 2012 15:22:44 UTC