From: Scott Nelson <scott(_at_)spamwolf(_dot_)com>
...
I'm not even sure I'd want sender generated labels like "HTML".
If it's well defined enough to be used, then I can probably put it
on the mail myself with greater accuracy then the sender would.
No, HTML labeling is a different kettle. It is about a technical
format that is unrelated semantic conten of the message. This is
demonstrated by the many HTML mail messages that can be translated to
7-bit ASCII text without most end users being able to see any difference.
Moreover, having the MUA guess about HTML is evil, dangerous, and
wrong because it tends to open security or at least privacy holes.
So what do you think the "consent" in "consent based communication"
should mean if not consent to particular content?
There is always one particular context that matters, the mail sender
talking to the target. It is practically impossible to characterize
variations of that context with content labelling such as "transactional"
vs. "advertising." It is difficult enough to distinguish "mail sender
sending bulk mail to many targets" from "mail sender sending private
mail to one or a few targets," but it can be done if only by having
targets care notes.
Vernon Schryver vjs(_at_)rhyolite(_dot_)com
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg