4 ms·
It was your own suggestion that spawned this thread. You wrote: "I may be totally naive here, but I'm not really sure why this matters. That there is a WC3 st
by jeroen 13y ago
It was your own suggestion that spawned this thread.
You wrote:
"I may be totally naive here, but I'm not really sure why this matters. That there is a WC3 standard does not imply that browsers have to adhere to it."
- https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6491428 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6491428
marcosdumay is responding to that by saying "It matters because ..."
- wdewind 13y agoSorry, fair point. My point that you quoted was that anyone could roll a browser that did not include the DRM standard (or any standard for that matter). And many do already. I don't think this implies that the W3C is dead.
- pdonis 13y agoanyone could roll a browser that did not include the DRM standard And how many people will use it, apart from outliers like people who post here? The vast majority of people use one of the Big Three: Firefox, Internet Exploder [no, that's not a typo ;)], and Chrome. Furthermore, if the Big Three implement a DRM standard, then web pages that want to "protect their content" will simply use the DRM standard, and it won't matter that Joe's Really Cool Browser doesn't implement it; that browser simply won't be able to view the pages. A few outliers like us will rant and rave; anyone else who tries it will say "Joe's Really Cool Browser Sucks" and go back to using one of the Big Three.