SM,
I can't recall whether your suggested received a response, but thought it
worth making sure: the change is being incorporated to the draft.
The difference in language does a nice job of being completely accurate and
precise without being cumbersome.
d/
SM wrote:
At 10:17 27-11-2007, Dave Crocker wrote:
Rather, DKIM's task is to allow an organization to say this it has
some responsibility for the message; that is, come to them if there is
a problem.
In the abstract of draft-ietf-dkim-overview-07
"DomainKeys Identified Mail (DKIM) allows an organization to take
responsibility for a message, in a way that can be validated by a
recipient."
I suggest having:
"DomainKeys Identified Mail (DKIM) allows an organization to take
responsibility for transmitting a message, in a way that can be
validated by a
recipient."
as the organization, an ISP for example, is not responsible for the
"content" of the message. The signer is merely offering a means for the
original or intermediate transmission to be validated.
The above comment applies to draft-ietf-dkim-deployment-00 as well.
Regards,
-sm
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html