IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Last-Call] New Version Notification for draft-crocker-inreply-react-07.txt

John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com> Sat, 27 February 2021 01:39 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@taugh.com>
X-Original-To: last-call@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: last-call@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60B003A1537 for <last-call@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 26 Feb 2021 17:39:57 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.1
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 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, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b=fnNbWfMB; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=Yu6IvmZi
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 iZbDJU5BMacl for <last-call@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 26 Feb 2021 17:39:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6DB983A14A1 for <last-call@ietf.org>; Fri, 26 Feb 2021 17:39:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 64144 invoked from network); 27 Feb 2021 01:39:53 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type; s=fa8e.6039a2e9.k2102; bh=k3eGsat84a26dTxqJk5+KTK8weu+wiVaDCLqfAzfxpM=; b=fnNbWfMBqRhg4/ZzlHO1/NBOiqcKkZTfDeZ6NLL5DlSgR1BGKWTrM6otNdAC/0ofgiHdTvjKCfyysTio77xwZtrY1orbF/oizYu5qWUfHj+my9ZGgWjIxCzxu8o1w8h/EmewEXq7Nx4Jt2GFLaw71cRXuxq6MRbFgC1q+nU2gfyGjNC09U8ecHVemuUGlWkwvgw1CgeEun2a03JMvEuwDXvofpXbfAlaDedKl7uFjYjnNzbfP9ZwMBEfkNaB5o0tgtZOIIg4VXKB10xlKeERkhs+Fn12HlzIB4QUOM10GTGq78Sp2x2jDm0j0DMxFJVIU2vD7pf1zA8cZaD6r2pSOQ==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type; s=fa8e.6039a2e9.k2102; bh=k3eGsat84a26dTxqJk5+KTK8weu+wiVaDCLqfAzfxpM=; b=Yu6IvmZiSmISEOkE1i1Aerj2bUqsCy5NYHZU3opDq/oukyXI3sI2pZS4PTMlrvrpJRJLZMKygsyhYyLcEG1q+L1B0/kY2BtpUSfS0XwB2FfxjC0spXwWRXl2USF22WOJBIeEhbdU+ZGMfM0gQXFJukfZkYoov2+ucy+KEtMJijLv0b3ezLzh0diwqFIEPomjVxa2SODATlhXYRL0dLVP7etBRdn4PmfaTys/1tEuos/WbGrn7xIL+NFVf2hR3ojBP3GvBw/O6ZVqRS1cbPY9zbUF91fd8JAhKvMPXkSULWe8Vn6LjGRJ5afI2wrHl1BKTjQ8G5IHI4UHKbha2SwA9g==
Received: from ary.qy ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTPS (TLS1.2 ECDHE-RSA AES-256-GCM AEAD) via TCP6; 27 Feb 2021 01:39:52 -0000
Received: by ary.qy (Postfix, from userid 501) id 42F7A6EF8B4A; Fri, 26 Feb 2021 20:39:51 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ary.qy (Postfix) with ESMTP id E685B6EF8B2C; Fri, 26 Feb 2021 20:39:51 -0500 (EST)
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2021 20:39:51 -0500
Message-ID: <2da68d7e-5f5f-b4bd-3d14-e5be523b5de@taugh.com>
From: John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: Dave Crocker <dcrocker@bbiw.net>, last-call@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <688c9a89-1d37-deb9-9a93-2a69f1a63f28@bbiw.net>
References: <20210227000746.583206EF7036@ary.qy> <1bf0f5b1-a7a8-8c9f-3d6a-6f29f57fdb37@bbiw.net> <aaa9869-a44f-d23c-a5d-4f9e9d6d6c75@taugh.com> <688c9a89-1d37-deb9-9a93-2a69f1a63f28@bbiw.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="0-279734858-1614389991=:82604"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/last-call/a_tnymasKKEYSHMFtI9e8MCCVI4>
Subject: Re: [Last-Call] New Version Notification for draft-crocker-inreply-react-07.txt
X-BeenThere: last-call@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Last Calls <last-call.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/last-call>, <mailto:last-call-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/last-call/>
List-Post: <mailto:last-call@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:last-call-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call>, <mailto:last-call-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 27 Feb 2021 01:39:57 -0000

>> On Fri, 26 Feb 2021, Dave Crocker wrote:
>> I'd flip it around.  What reason do we have to believe that any particular 
>> restricted vocabulary that we might define would be useful to users we 
>> don't know and who may not even speak any language we speak?
>
> cf, the reference to established practice, which is distinguished from 
> free-form text, which is what you now seem to be proposing

I see a rule allowing a string of emoji, which we've heard is problematic, 
and a base-emoji rule which has an unupported assertion that it's five 
emoji developed from existing practice, although I'm not aware of any 
existing application that uses that set.  Do you have a reference?  In the 
apps I use, the set of emoji responses differs from one device to the next 
and is invariably very large, hundreds at least.

> (which is odd, > given what stage of processing this draft is in.)

I agree that it was extremely premature to last call this draft.

Regards,
John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email