>> I think we actually agree, but I didn't express it very well. It's one >> thing to say this is a way to send emoji intended to be displayed as >> reactions to prior messages, another to offer advice about how that >> display might work. > > That and more. IME it's not that the IETF comes up with the wrong UX > answers, > it's that they ask the wrong UX questions. > > Now, anticipating Dave, it may well be that we're not alone in this, > and that > only actual experimentation can determine the right UX direction to > take. If > so, it's just another reason why we need an experiment.
Well... Totally bikeshedding on this issue...
I'll claim it very much is NOT another reason for the IETF to treat this as an experiment. (In effect, that would expand the scope of concern for the IETF, which exactly what we should avoid, wrt this realm.)
Some idea of the overall UX direction is important to the IETF effort because it's possible we've specified the wrong underlying mechanism. (Or more likely, we need to specify some additional stuff.) This doesn't mean we should standardize any of it. Ned -- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
