On 1/15/2014 10:43 AM, Olivier Thereaux wrote:
On 14 Jan 2014, at 22:07, Markus Demmel <[email protected]> wrote:
Or in programmers terms: a fork? (maybe with some later added specs from the
W3C)
Before anyone gets enthusiastic about the idea: please remember the significant
difference between forking open source software and forking an open standard.
I have not heard about any objections from the Free Software Community
about any of the Open Web Platform (OWP) specs other than EME.
Accordingly, a subset of the OWP which removes EME would more accurately
be characterized as a "profile" of the OWP, rather than a fork of the OWP.
A fork of the web platform means a world of interoperability issues. Think:
browser wars. It is hard to see how that can be a better option than an
interoperable web platform which includes unpleasant features or badly designed
components.
Interoperability, not purity is the main objective of an open standard. A fork
should always, always be the worst case scenario.
Thanks,
—
Olivier
-----------------------------
http://www.bbc.co.uk
This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and
may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless
specifically stated.
If you have received it in
error, please delete it from your system.
Do not use, copy or disclose the
information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the sender
immediately.
Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails
sent or received.
Further communication will signify your consent to
this.
-----------------------------
