4 ms·
The W3C is still very relevant, in particular in the context here. EME DRM, for example, is a W3C spec, https://www.w3.org/TR/encrypted-media/ https://www.w3.o
by azakai 11y ago
The W3C is still very relevant, in particular in the context here. EME DRM, for example, is a W3C spec,
https://www.w3.org/TR/encrypted-media/ https://www.w3.org/TR/encrypted-media/
driven by Google, Microsoft and Netflix.
In other words, if the W3C fought back against DRM, we might not have EME today. But, Google and Microsoft won and DRM was added to the web.
- icebraining 11y agoBut Google and Microsoft don't need the W3C approval to win; they just get together with Apple and implement it. In fact, we've already seen the browser vendors move ahead of the W3C in the HTML5 spec, forming the WHATWG, so why wouldn't they - except Mozilla - just do that again?
- azakai 11y agoThey could have ignored the W3C, but losing in the W3C would have been a significant thing. It would have shown the web community is taking a stand against DRM. It could have helped further battles against DRM. Instead, by winning at the W3C, Google and Microsoft made DRM's victory as official as possible.