EME v2 FPWD tracking issue

[chrisn]

Following discussion at TPAC 2022, this issue tracks the work needed to get to First Public Working Draft for EME v2.

• Add encryption scheme capability detection - WICG draft
• Add HDCP policy detection - WICG draft, open issues, and original issue: Early detection of output protection status #311
• Add find duplicate sessions - See API to find existing sessions #467, alternative designs, and charter review discussion, Note: The WG has since decided not to include this in EME v2.

We also have issues labelled as V2 and V2-Bugfixes, but my understanding is that publishing FPWD isn't dependent on these (aside from #467).

[chrisn]

@gregwfreedman @joeyparrish @xhwang-chromium We can schedule meeting time as needed to progress or triage issues, just let me know.

[xhwang-chromium]

Since last WG meeting in late March 2023 , we triaged existing EME issues and added labels to them.

• V2 issues should go into the FPWD.
• V3 issues will go into the next charter.
• Backlog issues will needs to be triaged

Since then we have not made much progress on closing the V2 issues.

We discussed about this briefly in yesterday's (March 16, 2023) WG meeting. It'd be great if we close out the V2 issues and make the FPWD available.

[joeyparrish]

I have PRs up for most open issues in the V2 milestone, except:

• Clarity regarding Robustness string in EME Spec  #521, where I proposed some text and am waiting for feedback before implementing
• Broken references in Encrypted Media Extensions #510, where I believe Editorial: Export concepts used by Encrypted Media Extensions whatwg/html#6242 would be part of the fix
• "valid MIME type" is the wrong primitive #511 and Valid MIME type and tests #512, which would appear to be wrapped up in Broken references in Encrypted Media Extensions #510 as well

[chrisn]

Thank you! I think we can go ahead to request FPWD independently of those, so I'll raise a call for consensus.

[joeyparrish]

Sounds good

[gregwfreedman]

SGTM

…

On Wed, Jun 5, 2024 at 9:59 AM Joey Parrish ***@***.***> wrote: Sounds good — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#501 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AEVHVMJ777JRKTSQB2ZYIHLZF47XZAVCNFSM6AAAAAARWHAFQKVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDCNJQGUZTONZSGU> . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***>