-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Thomas Jacob wrote:
Julian Mehnle wrote:
BTW don't we want to read "comply" where "conform" is written in
... there are currently two library implementations that
are known to _fully conform_ to the final SPFv1 specification (RFC
4408)
I'm trying to understand the difference between "comply" and "fully
conform" in this context (my native language not being English),
could you please shed some light on that?
I don't think there is any. What makes you think otherwise?
This part:
--> BTW don't we want to read "comply" where "conform" is written in
That was a question by John A. Martin. That question doesn't make "comply"
and "fully conform" have separate meanings.
As a matter of fact, it was _me_ who wrote that part[1] of <http://www.
openspf.org/Implementations>, and my intent was to put the fully confor-
ming implementations "pyspf 2.0" and "Mail::SPF" in contrast to the NOT
fully conforming legacy implementation "Mail::SPF::Query". Thus I can say
with certainty that no difference between "comply" and "fully conform" was
intended. I don't get where anyone sees such a difference. (Note that I
am not a native English speaker, though.)
References:
1.
http://www.openspf.org/?action=browse&diff=1&id=Implementations&revision=87&diffrevision=86
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFF+egJwL7PKlBZWjsRAlU1AJsHI0mjkUXicVF11/BvI23OO/g72wCffgcy
xmgi4yT5DHzLCfUFyLs1QB8=
=UILe
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-------
Sender Policy Framework: http://www.openspf.org/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your
subscription,
please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?list_id=735