Re: [Last-Call] Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-crocker-inreply-react-08: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

[Dave Crocker <[e-mail]>]

On 3/5/2021 3:07 PM, Kjetil Torgrim Homme wrote:
> On Fri, 2021-03-05 at 13:52 -0800, Dave Crocker wrote:
>> On 3/4/2021 12:41 AM, Kjetil Torgrim Homme wrote:
>>>      2.  If R's In-Reply-To: does reference one, then check R's message
>>>          content for a part with a "reaction" Content-Disposition header
>>>          field, at either the outermost level or as part of a multipart
>>>          at the outermost level.
>>>
>>> This means a forwarded message will*not*  get its embedded reactions
>>> processed.  Well, forwarded messages will typically not have I-R-T set,
>>> but if a message includes previous correspondence as an attached MIME
>>> document.
>>
>> Not 'typically'.  A forwarded message is not a reply.
> 
> I can forward a message as a reply to a different message (drag and
> drop it as an attachment), but the "forward" button in my mail reader
> will not do that - it will only set References and not I-R-T.

You mean you can include a message in a reply.  That's not typically 
what is meant by forwarding.  But yes, you can do that.

The example in my previous note still applies.  The contained message is 
self-contained and any references inside it are not affected by the 
containing message.  Similar, the contents of the containing message 
(typically) does not reflect the contained message.



>> So I'm not sure how this is a problem.
> 
> It's not a problem, just an edge case.

Sorry, but so far, I am not seeing how it is even that.


> 
>> In any event, if there is no In-reply-to: field, then this specification
>> is not relevant to that message.
> 
> There is an In-Reply-To inside the attached message, that's my point.
>   It could even be nested further.

So? Again, I am still missing the point.


> 
>>> However, In-reply-to in messages in the attached
>>> correspondence will get their reactions processed if they are at the
>>> correct relative level in the structure.
>>
>> Let's see whether I understand, with an example meant to be more
>> interesting than the one in the specification:
>>
>>> From:  me
>>> To: you
>>> Subject: I just got this message
>>>
>>> ---- Forwarded message
>>> From: someone else
>>> To: me
>>> In-Reply-To: a previous message between us
>>> Content-Disposition: reaction
>>>
>>> U+1F997
>>
>> The containing message isn't using MIME, to make the forwarded message
>> an attachment.  I think it doesn't matter, for this example.
> 
> Well, a real example would have to use MIME, a MUA should not try to
> assign meaning to "---- Forwarded message" or "---- Vidaresendt
> melding", but I'll consider your example a shorthand for a proper MIME
> structure.

As I said, I believe use of MIME to make the contained message an 
attachment, rather than inline, does not affect this.

Since you apparently think otherwise, please explain.


> OK, so processing MAY recurse into the MIME structure?  I don't think
> the current step 2 allows this.

Yes it does:

> The emoji(s) express a recipient's summary reaction to the
> specific message referenced by the accompanying In-Reply-To header field,


The In-Reply-To: and Content-Disposition must be 'accompanying' each 
other.  In the same message.


   This can cause duplication in the
> presentation of reactions, 

How?


d/

-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net