On 1/16/08 at 12:28 AM +0100, Mark Martinec wrote:
The originator fields indicate the mailbox(es) of the source of the
message. The "From:" field specifies the author(s) of the message,
that is, the mailbox(es) of the person(s) or system(s) responsible
for the writing of the message. The "Sender:" field specifies the
mailbox of the agent responsible for the actual transmission of the
message. For example, if a secretary were to send a message for
another person, the mailbox of the secretary would appear in the
"Sender:" field and the mailbox of the actual author would appear in
the "From:" field. If the originator of the message can be indicated
by a single mailbox and the author and transmitter are identical, the
"Sender:" field SHOULD NOT be used. Otherwise, both fields SHOULD
In this paragraph a term "originator of the message" is used for the
first and the only time, and is nowhere defined. Other text only
speaks of "originator fields" (= From, Sender, Reply-To).
Also, the term "transmitter" is used here for the first time too,
and is never defined.
You are getting into territory where I feel like you're trying to
overstate the obvious, and I can't figure out what problem you're
trying to solve.
"The originator" of the message is the entity or entities specified
in the originator fields.
"The transmitter" of the message is the entity responsible for
transmitting the message.
It seems redundant to say those things.
The originator might be one entity (who is both the author and the
transmitter and specified in the "From:" field), or the originator
might be one or more authors (specified in the "From:" field) plus a
separate transmitter (specified in the "Sender:" field).
Is there something in the above that you can not glean from 3.6.2?
And what problem are we trying to solve by attempting to overtly
define these terms in this very circular way?
Pete Resnick <http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/>
Qualcomm Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102