On 2/26/2021 5:05 PM, John C Klensin wrote:
In particular, if an MUA provides special
arrangements for a "reaction" as the I-D seems to suggest and
one can send <frowning-face> using the facility but not "Snark!"
or "Bleech" I think experience with user interfaces predicts
that users will become frustrated with the distinction and
either not use the reaction-specific mechanism or whine a lot.
On the average, specifications that start simpler, allowing user
experience pressure to prompt adding more features, fare far better than
specifications that try to be all-inclusive at the start, with every
feature anyone can think of. (cf, Internet vs OSI, at every level.)
Simpler to understand. Simpler to implement. Simpler to use.
In this case, there also is established experience for more constrained
reaction mechanisms. All of the more flexible cases that have been
cited here occur within unbounded text, not within a reaction mechanism.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
--
last-call mailing list
last-call@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
