On 5/15/14, 6:01 AM, Jim wrote:
Mozilla have supported the W3C and the EME all the way
Uh... are you serious? The Mozilla people who are on the record speaking about this issue before today (me, Robert, Henri) come across that way to you?
and are still a member of the W3C
Yes, we were even a member when they did things like XHTML2....
Even when W3C employees started joking about assassinating EME dissenters
I was not aware that this had happened. That's clearly not acceptable in a professional setting.
Mozilla have a representative on the W3C TAG and the TAG produced a draft document on the EME that is a complete joke
We have _a_ representative on the TAG. The tag does not require unanimous consensus for documents it produces, so can produce documents over the objections of some of its members.
just ask Henri.
I'll turn this around. Have _you_ talked to Henri about this?
Mozilla has made no formal objection to the EME at the W3C.
That's true, but there is actually little point to doing that: others have already raised formal objections, we know how TBL will decide on such formal objections, and we've already made our feelings on the matter known so there is nothing to be gained from a formal objection that way.
On the other hand, given that all of our competitors _are_ shipping DRM no matter what we, or the W3C for that matter, do, the least bad option is for them all to ship it behind the same API, at least.
Mozilla sold out for fear of losing market share.
That's a perfectly valid point of view.
You didn't even try to make a case to users to stick with Firefox if they were forced to use an alternative browser to view some media content. Windows users already have IE installed and you could have just deferred to IE for content requiring EME - users have already chosen to use Firefox over IE so see value in Firefox.
I suspect this would have been non-viable, and you overestimate how much value users see in any browser and how much the annoyance of this behavior would just drive them to IE completely. But it's possible I'm wrong, of course.
There was a proposal made at the W3C that would have further mitigated concerns of losing market share but Mozilla was not interested.
Can you link to this proposal please? I'm not aware of it...
Mozilla understood this and insisted on this design.
Citation, please? -Boris _______________________________________________ governance mailing list governance@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
