This question already has answers here:
Is there a way to use DRM on HTML5 video?
(7 answers)
Closed 8 years ago.
Does HTML5 audio/video support OMA DRM or any third party DRM?
No, it doesn't.
At least, not yet. But given the trouble we're having getting browser manufacturers to even agree on a standard format I can only imagine how hard it would be to get them all to support a standard DRM (or even to support it at all!)
It does now.
https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/html-media/raw-file/tip/encrypted-media/encrypted-media.html
Here is an example.
http://www.html5rocks.com/en/tutorials/eme/basics/
This is the best page that I could find on current browser support.
http://www.jwplayer.com/html5/mediasource/
At the time of writing this, EME is supported in
IE11 in Win8.1
Chrome (Desktop and mobile)
Safari 8 in OSX Yosemite
Let's think about what it is that you're trying to do.
HTML5 sends information over the HTTP protocol. This includes embedded flash videos, HTML5 {video} tags (if ever finished!), pictures, lyrics, text, links, and javascript.
All of these components are always transmitted in plaintext. If HTML5 were to include any form of protection on these elements (i.e. tags that indicate that you can't copy?... {drm}{/drm}, etc), it is still up to any software interpreting this HTTP data, to decide whether or not to enforce it.
You can look at a video tag such as youtube or dailymotion - the source it references is always accessible at a standard HTTP address - with or without DRM, the means of downloading this video are within everybody's reach!
This implies that the protocol, by design, does not allow for copy-protection.
For future reference, ask yourself "Is the data (and how it is operated upon) ever in the customer's hands?". If the answer is 'yes', DRM does not make sense to apply.
Related
Is there any way we could live stream "video/mp2t" content in the browser? I'm building a live stream app where some urls don't have any mimetype specified but the content is "video/mp2t". I've tried to use the major html 5 players: jwplayer, shaka-player, video.js, and none of them seem to support this kind of content out of the box. I've read that might be possible to transmux on the fly to mp4, do you guys know any example or some guidelines?
Android and ios seem to support this but the browser not, why is that? Do you think it's something to be incorporated in the future?
Thanks!
I've read that might be possible to transmux on the fly to mp4
Yes, you can write the code yourself, or base it on a another library like mux.js. But as you said, nothing does this out of the box.
Android and ios seem to support this but the browser not, why is that?
There are dozens or hundreds of container formats. Supporting them all would be ridiculous. Different companies, and different standard bodies make different decisions on what they think their users will require.
Do you think it's something to be incorporated in the future?
No, I don't.
We'd like to build a small specialized clone of the ill-fated popcorn-time project, that is to say a node-webkit frontend for peerflix. The videos we'd like to play are mkv files that have embedded ASS subtitle tracks, and we can't seem to get the embedded subtitles to show up: while VLC nicely shows them, html5 video players in webkit-based things don't, not even in Google Chrome (so it's not a matter of Chromium's reduced codec support).
Now, I'm a bit out of our depths here, I don't really know much about these things, but it seems to me the media engine underneath webkit just ignores the ASS subtitle track here. Is it because it's ASS? Is it a matter of codecs somehow? Or is it, after all, a html5 thing? Now, the html5 video "living standard" mentions that "captions can be provided, either embedded in the video stream or as external files using the track element" - so the feature is at least planned, but I do realize that implementation is lacking. However, given that node-webkit uses ffmpeg as the underlying engine, it seems strange to me that the subtitles are not picked up at all.
Could someone more knowledgeable please advise us the problem? Also, is there anything we could do about it?
Extracting the subtitles beforehand is not an option, though I have been playing with the idea of extracting the subtitles on the fly, and feeding that stream back to the player - I had some modest success with this, and it looks like it could be done with some effort, but I'm really out of my depth here, and the whole idea is pretty contrived anyway.
However, I find it improbable that nobody has run into this problem before, hence this question: is there any way to show embedded (ASS) subtitle tracks in a streamed video in node-webkit?
Not sure if this would help but according to this page node-webkit doesn't ship with codec for patented media formats. They do have a few suggestions on the page, one of which is to compile your own node-webkit.
You could try using Popcorn Time's ffmpegsumo file which is what I used when I needed mp3 support and Chrome's version didn't work. Although, I don't know if that supports ASS subtitle format(considering its use, I would think it has to).
Note: I would have commented this answer but unfortunately I don't have commenting privileges yet. A couple of upvotes sure would be nice ;)
I'm trying to give a little more clarity to TTS sentences by indicating emphasis, etc. I'm using the Chrome TTS API, which indicates that it accepts SSML-formatted documents in addition to raw text.
After many attempts, and a reading a few comments on the web, it doesn't look like this is actually supported, or possibly that this is up to individual voices for implementation.
Does anyone know:
Has SSML been abandoned under Chrome?
If not, is there any indication whether they expect to support it via native voice, or they're hoping that someone else will implement?
Do any Chrome voices currently exist that support this?
Thanks!
I'm a Chrome engineer. SSML support has not been implemented yet, but it's planned. Obviously not all engines would support it, but when we implement SSML support we'll also implement support for stripping SSML from engines that don't support it.
Sorry the documentation is misleading here.
Star this bug to express interest and get notified when it's fixed: https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=88072
If anyone's looking at this later, you can control prosody on Mac Chrome using Apple's native command syntax, at least for the default voices:
the square root of [[pbas +4]] 2 [[char LTRL]]a[[char NORM]] to the [[pbas +4]] 14 [[char LTRL]]x[[char NORM]]
Documented here.
A friend of mine and I are looking to start a project looking into accessible user interface (for blind users) design. There are a number of projects making existing GUI's accessible by tagging them with audio information but we're looking to work from the ground up and actually take input from a ML and create an accessible application.
I'm trying to figure out what ML to use and am torn between three at the moment. The three I'm considering are XAML,MXML, and XUL. Currently, I'm leaning towards XUL because it's open but I was wondering if anyone could think of any pros/cons that I might be missing? I know that XAML is the most popular but does it do things that XUL can't? How similar are they?
I should add that whatever ML we end up using we will be extending the syntax so that we can provide additional information to the audio system.
I have already addressed this question to some extent here.
The pros/cons of XUL are:
it's open
it's cross platform
it's well established with a large community
it still basically has to be run in a browser that supports XUL (firefox)
one of the comments from my question stated that XUL is a bad choice because firefos is buggy
The pros/cons of XAML are:
it'll work on Windows/Mac
it has a well established drag-drop IDE (VS 2010) to create GUIs
it has a massive support community
it's closed source
it's a closed platform, IE. it not an open standard (not covered under ECMA like .NET and C#)
there are legal issues regarding the use on non microsoft/mac plagforms (see my post)
it requires either a browser with a the silverlight plug-in or the .NET framework to use it on the desktop
it's developed/controlled by MS. This isn't an attempt to troll. Seriously, look it up on google. There are a lot of people who are suspicious of MS's intent behind creating XAML and it has garnered a lot of negativity behind the platform. It might be worth taking into consideration.
The pros/cons of MXML:
it's cross platform
it's closed source
it runs on a closed platform
it requires adobe flash (which, a lot of people claim is a dying platform now that Apple is rejecting to support/allow it).
it requires a browser with a plug-in
Note: I can't really say much about MXML because this is the first time I've heard about it. I just pointed out the obvious pros/cons for completeness. I'll have to research it and add an entry to in the question I linked.
XUL application can be run under XUL Runner because after Firefox 4, remote XUL application execution within Firefox browser is prohibited
How to create a WAP website?
What software do I use?
Do I just need to use HTML coding or other type of language?
And after I created it, Can I view it on my own phone?
Do I need a server to let it run or I can just view it on my phone?
Can someone help please, its for my project.
Thanks alot.
What phones are you targeting? Any phone released in the last 3-5 years is able to view standard (X)HTML without issue - except for the fact that they mostly have very small screens.
Some phones do not support Javascript very well (but that is mostly changing, too) and most phones do not support Flash (yet - most newish phones except iPhone will probably support flash "soon", if not already).
The only other main difference is that most phones these days use a touch interface, rather than a traditional keyboard/mouse. That means you can't really do things like hover effects and so on.
But other than the smaller size, everything else is pretty minor.
I agree with the post above that unless you are targeting very old phones, there is probably very little point to working with WAP today - AFAIK the last official version was WAP 2.0 which was circa 2002.
WAP 2.0 used a streamlined version of XHTML. The best way to develop is to either navigate your phone to a standard HTTP server hosting your files - or download and use a simulator. I found the best practice was to develop the app until it worked on the simulator (which could often be directed to load local files) and then do final testing and tweaking with actual devices.