IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [ietf-822] RFC 9078 Reaction: Indicating Summary Reaction to a Message

Rob Sayre <sayrer@gmail.com> Tue, 09 April 2024 23:30 UTC

Return-Path: <sayrer@gmail.com>
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 0A947C14F6BB for <ietf-822@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Apr 2024 16:30:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TXopDlmjQFjS for <ietf-822@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Apr 2024 16:30:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ed1-x533.google.com (mail-ed1-x533.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::533]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CF639C14F610 for <ietf-822@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 Apr 2024 16:30:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ed1-x533.google.com with SMTP id 4fb4d7f45d1cf-56e69888a36so3284894a12.3 for <ietf-822@ietf.org>; Tue, 09 Apr 2024 16:30:05 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1712705404; x=1713310204; darn=ietf.org; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=tjsVaNvfGc41ZUWXyOtNTfbME2cOGTMT3PeOgKCAyQg=; b=hGq8Wq9+5OzBMyql7rt8yZv7ssULlfBpts62RAxzNP2xkfhQuWiLMvNwqaxN+LpDny aiJVvu/6LpH0tsbDD5FdLFACMkuweQ8lwExpbLVPmikIYV5yv0qNzM953inNliTsvCe3 Jub68GdZCGK/O+vBqgU8BQ4G9dhfjlhYhmRbp0zBgexQ78oXzafajMQY2lM7jG8z2z32 W4YQXrstFMEdRYmbzYdmzv0MMJgB21YPX6TSeT0DOWnTHVQ+zmaxImLLyI7lHcbu0hBX bn5uxw+xhyyXxHmqhDTUAtH2p4w+8ie7dLOretYCZ+WzMDmuFgc2CgSMXJw06+CflLzM 7cyQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1712705404; x=1713310204; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=tjsVaNvfGc41ZUWXyOtNTfbME2cOGTMT3PeOgKCAyQg=; b=VW+CS3nFMH3qjsWb03wGE/ltNHNKIY54cpwqm3ZzjFrKIrZv3gOysqTqO2qDTdJfZZ HlDZsDiuaB1DBwjXVAFz5IaQge2xnUXstisslKSGvP47VKE/zSBXAi6EQ5hTr2JKPbgV YujsTT7NwTifhHv7xmghq5mAUYjKtekwRQUtqJM8ms1jvk29XICyAKXrFQ8FEfFKRDlo b+B00K4uVUJTamPMCG2ltdCLzjChU8vk+W8x6wFi7dWxrLlrlTM3NR/ILwgGxrBEwu6K pclqLguiP9mSxbRV7a3JlNHGbZ7VurEg25R5ymYzuIXrpJKuxBdOfeHNgkW15tXbINLm C0HA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzWm4AZu0qqG1kQfqmcZZ/E5YbN+Ie42H0r1+SLYgakjTK1cneo hV2bwUHwl0Ds72LpOkJ4BkkHPK2bO5J4vQPp+MVN7qpUT9hQajiKl/7veQI7GbZqUB2drgQcXkG xBMOxhtfPn4pC8rcQ6Iu7PkwkZIxOrJaUnVGakR16
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEEIz807cwWtr2zlvwOaPCDPe0f7YQBxuITF+rKdj8l/d6wYdaxjsjr2gwtlmytAFukUoRDxRf2kCIegUryp1E=
X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:25ca:b0:a4e:768a:1445 with SMTP id ae10-20020a17090725ca00b00a4e768a1445mr483224ejc.16.1712705403964; Tue, 09 Apr 2024 16:30:03 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAChr6SwVPb7nX-8bmoPtTGuuW1jHoKnMkiwcrLQhi5_avPCxoA@mail.gmail.com> <CAChr6Sw9wHUSsWYBzXL=a5GZ9V5d6z0jHFVRTw7a15V1PaT5-Q@mail.gmail.com> <fc94f6b6-5528-4327-9971-ce2666c12233@dcrocker.net> <CAChr6SyFVs-hjBob4SFCCocdxAY4eWxE7RuFgj9SdeA=U4kk5g@mail.gmail.com> <96f6589c-8e18-494e-b7d6-e91d21b30447@dcrocker.net>
In-Reply-To: <96f6589c-8e18-494e-b7d6-e91d21b30447@dcrocker.net>
From: Rob Sayre <sayrer@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2024 16:29:52 -0700
Message-ID: <CAChr6SxcqrW+Dcv8KCEWQwZVvgCr0s9CBb6S2iuGTEWvFPXKQQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: dcrocker@bbiw.net
Cc: ietf-822@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000003558af0615b24d68"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-822/fL_aL4dOMJ-Cu46JYqbye0uqliQ>
Subject: Re: [ietf-822] RFC 9078 Reaction: Indicating Summary Reaction to a Message
X-BeenThere: ietf-822@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: Tue, 09 Apr 2024 23:30:07 -0000

On Tue, Apr 9, 2024 at 4:18 PM Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net> wrote:

> On 4/9/2024 4:13 PM, Rob Sayre wrote:
> > The point here is that "kanjis" is not really written in English, and
> > the same rules should apply to "emoji",
>
> 1. Why should the same rule apply?  Shared country of origin
> notwithstanding they have no common history of usage or similar semantics.
>

They do have similar semantics. Kanji are logographic characters, where one
character represents a word or concept. Emoji are the same. In contrast,
Japanese also has the syllabic scripts hiragana and katakana, where you
sound things out.


>
> 2. As already noted, established usage permits the s.
>

Yes, technically allowed. I am saying it is not the best choice.


>
> 3. Having it does not affect utility or understanding of the ABNF.
>

I think the draft is a good idea. Reading "emojis" was a red flag to me,
but it's true that you don't have to fix it. It just put some doubt in my
mind.

thanks,
Rob

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email