On Tuesday 05 September 2006 13:19, Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
From: Douglas Otis [mailto:dotis(_at_)mail-abuse(_dot_)org]
On Sep 5, 2006, at 8:48 AM, Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
Using the term 'practices' instead of policy is not going to fool
anyone, the objection is to the idea, not the name. The
term practices
is highly loaded and has its own meaning and will cause even more
people to shudder.
...
I agree that the record ONLY contains a statement by the sender that is
descriptive of sender actions.
However the record is not bound by protocol to the actual actions of the
sender and so the term 'practices' cannot be used with accuracy. What the
record specifies is in fact the intended practice.
The English term for an intended practice is 'policy'.
+1
Scott K
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html