Re: [ietf-822] A "Reaction" strawman to throw into the mix
Pete Resnick <resnick@episteme.net> Mon, 02 November 2020 21:20 UTC
Return-Path: <resnick@episteme.net>
X-Original-To: ietf-822@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf-822@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DAEF3A15EE for <ietf-822@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 13:20:13 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Gkg88AO423Ar for <ietf-822@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 13:20:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from episteme.net (episteme.net [216.169.5.102]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D36C23A13A6 for <ietf-822@ietf.org>; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 13:19:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by episteme.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23CFAC471B2B; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 15:19:23 -0600 (CST)
Received: from episteme.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (episteme.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id O9VOXtgZLfFZ; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 15:19:15 -0600 (CST)
Received: from [172.16.1.10] (episteme.net [216.169.5.102]) by episteme.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AD62BC471B17; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 15:19:14 -0600 (CST)
From: Pete Resnick <resnick@episteme.net>
To: dcrocker@bbiw.net
Cc: ietf-822@ietf.org
Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2020 15:19:14 -0600
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.13.2r5726)
Message-ID: <F19D70F9-272D-4A4E-8C06-8D3FA1A0EB03@episteme.net>
In-Reply-To: <4457df09-cbf8-f61d-30f0-a7a73f6cd960@dcrocker.net>
References: <B6A2D19C-1790-4ACC-857B-DA4AFD0D4A86@episteme.net> <4457df09-cbf8-f61d-30f0-a7a73f6cd960@dcrocker.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-822/FfArXlRUxW5c21RwmPUA38ilHYE>
Subject: Re: [ietf-822] A "Reaction" strawman to throw into the mix
X-BeenThere: ietf-822@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion of issues related to Internet Message Format \[RFC 822, RFC 2822, RFC 5322\]" <ietf-822.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf-822>, <mailto:ietf-822-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf-822/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-822@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-822-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-822>, <mailto:ietf-822-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2020 21:20:21 -0000
On 2 Nov 2020, at 11:24, Dave Crocker wrote: > On 10/29/2020 10:49 PM, Pete Resnick wrote: >> it reuses existing pieces of infrastructure that seem to fit this >> use, > > Except that, really, this use is semantically quite different from the > intended use of MDN (RFC 8098): > >> "...used by a Mail User >> Agent (MUA) or electronic mail gateway to report the disposition >> of a >> message after it has been successfully delivered to a recipient." > > The goal of indicating a recipient's reaction is quite different from > indicating disposition of a message. I don't disagree. However, the semantics provided by MDN is that of associating a disposition with a particular message, and it has all of the machinery to do that association. Associating a reaction with the original messages seems to me much the same as associating an indication that a message was "read" or "dispatched" or "deleted". Yes, it definitely extends the purpose of MDNs, but it doesn't seem like a huge stretch. > In structural terms, the MDN is also a more constrained environment > than a general email message. Hence, using it for reactions limits > the context for including reactions. How so? You do have a user-readable part to include a message to the user, which can be any sort of content type. > Adding the ability to have a reply message include content tagged as a > reaction adds to the semantics of email exchange. When I think of reactions, I think of providing a UI to add a "Like" button or similar. That seems separate to me from replies, and in some cases replaces it. Having the the user readable part allows you to do a reply should you desire, but I suspect the primary kind of implementation for this kind of feature is a one-hit button for indicating a reaction to a message, similar to the sort that I've seen for implementing "I read this." Both MDNs and a reaction strike me as "add this adornment to the sender's message" rather than "send this message as a reply to the sender's message". MDNs seems semantically closer to the purpose, and the implementation of adding a reaction, both on the sender's side and the receiver's side, seems closer to MDNs. > Having a message designed for signaling information, about message > handling, be modified to include end-user reactions distorts its > original purpose and limits the added function. As I said, I agree that this is a change in purpose for MDNs, but I don't see it as particularly horrible distortion. But as I said at the beginning, I can certainly live with Ned's proposal. MDNs just struck me as cleaner. pr -- Pete Resnick https://www.episteme.net/ All connections to the world are tenuous at best
- [ietf-822] A "Reaction" strawman to throw into th… Pete Resnick
- Re: [ietf-822] A "Reaction" strawman to throw int… Dave Crocker
- Re: [ietf-822] A "Reaction" strawman to throw int… Dave Crocker
- Re: [ietf-822] A "Reaction" strawman to throw int… John Levine
- Re: [ietf-822] A "Reaction" strawman to throw int… Pete Resnick
- Re: [ietf-822] A "Reaction" strawman to throw int… Alessandro Vesely
- Re: [ietf-822] A "Reaction" strawman to throw int… Dave Crocker