SM wrote:
Hi Dave,
At 09:32 17-03-2006, Dave Crocker wrote:
I am not understanding your concern. I added the word "responsible"
to each of the defintions, in order to make explicit that
responsibility is what we are focused on.
I suggested removing the word "responsible" as from the point of view of
the distributor or retailer, it may not always be clear who the author is.
The point of DKIM is to focus on accurate and reliable
accountability/responsibility. So, the definition of a DKIM signture is simply
that the signer takes responsibility (whatever that means.)
In the explanations for each label, the only responsibility each is given is for
doing their own, particular actions.
Hence, the author is responsible for creating the content. That responsibility
does not depend upon whether we can identify them, although it certainly has an
effect on their accountability...
No, I do not view the word "responsible" as redundant. The repetition
stresses who is responsible for what.
If your concern is something else, what is it?
My concern is that the determination of authorship is not clear-cut when
we talk about mail.
OK. Does my above discussion clarify that the language is not meant 'author
responsibility' does not require knowing know who the author is?
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
<http://bbiw.net>
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html