Indeed - this is the first thing I looked up. It's directly against the Mission of the W3C to support proposals such as this. If people want this feature, it is going to have to be a non-W3C standard.
I've been commenting against various forms of anti-web proposals such as this for more than a decade. Every 3-4 years somebody proposes to accept RAND (non-free) licensing terms. This time around it's non-free content distribution. Let's hope the W3C remembers who they are, and what they're for, once again.
I've been commenting against various forms of anti-web proposals such as this for more than a decade. Every 3-4 years somebody proposes to accept RAND (non-free) licensing terms. This time around it's non-free content distribution. Let's hope the W3C remembers who they are, and what they're for, once again.