On Thu, 2021-02-25 at 12:44 -0600, Adam Roach wrote: > On 2/25/21 12:34, Patrik Fältström wrote: > > It is exactly where the boundary is between code points that are > > allowed and not you have the key issues here. > > > > The draft DO refer to very specific rules that are to be followed. > > > > If it was not, I would not be as worried. > > So you'd be okay if the document just removed the codepoint restrictions > and instead limited it to one line which is intended to convey a > pictographic reaction? That seems like a reasonable compromise, as it > would allow popular reactions like "¯\_(ツ)_/¯" and "(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻" > without needing a later revision. This was partially one of the points I made earlier. The draft is eerily silent on what to do with a reaction like "J". It is not an unallocated code point, but it is not a valid emoji either. When I brought it up, Dave seemed to expect it to be presented as the plain "J" it is. (Also consider the draft explicitly accepts single-byte emojis, even though this is at odds with Emoji-Seq.) I do not want some clients presenting the "J" as a "J" and some as a smiley (think Wingdings) and some as a Unicode replacement character. The easy way out is to not restrict the allowable set of codepoints, which means allowing the shrug sequence and the table rage sequence above. I will note that the draft's grammar allows whitespace between each "emoji", or let's call them individual emotions, which means "Great Job" could parse as two emotions. Or not. My preferred solution is still that all non-emoji (according to TR51) should be presented as if they were unallocated code points. Speaking of whitespace, the grammar uses LWSP = *(WSP / CRLF WSP) This is IMHO at odds with "The content of this part is restricted to single line of emoji." Why allow CRLF if only a single line is allowed? Why restrict to a single line? Another thing which could be spelled out in the draft is whether multiple parts with "Content-disposition: reaction" (at the same level in the mime structure) is allowed. Per normal MIME behaviour it should be. Suggestion: -A message sent as a reply MAY include a part containing: +A message sent as a reply MAY include one or more parts containing: Using multiple reaction parts can be used to circumvent the restriction of a single line of emojis. -- venleg helsing, Kjetil T. -- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
