On 2/8/2021 7:42 PM, Dale R. Worley wrote:
After sending my previous message, I realized that I had gone to length
explaining why I considered the term "accompanying" to be ill-defined,
but I had forgotten to mention that in my review, I'd added "Or perhaps
this should be forward-referenced to the discussion in section 3." Just
adding a reference to section 3 would clarify it, because section 3
covers the matter well.
Another version that would be good is "The emoji(s) express a
recipient's summary reaction to the specific message referenced by the
In-Reply-To header field of the message in which it is present."
Here's the latest version:
The emoji(s) express a recipient's summary reaction to the specific
message referenced by the accompanying In-Reply-To header field, for the
message in which they both are present. [Mail-Fmt]. For processing
details, see Section 3.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
