Re: Revised proposed text for intermediary

[ Removed w3c-wsa-editors ]

* Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler) <RogerCutler@chevrontexaco.com> [2003-07-16 09:33-0500]
> It may have been explained in a previous thread, but I really don't
> understand "A message may be intended for an intermediary, or may be
> transparently processed by one."  I think that this should be clarified.
> Apparently there is a distinction between "intended for" and "ultimate
> message receiver", but that distinction is not clear to me.

This is referring to intermediaries which may be doing some
transparent processing of the message, i.e. the message was not
explicitly targeted to it but a firewall inspects, possibly
processes, and then forwards (or maybe not) the message to the next
agent on the message path.

Maybe this sentence should be replaced by a more descriptive one, such
as:

  Certain intermediaries may be explicitly targeted by the original
  message senders. Others may be processing the message transparently,
  without the message sender or receiver's knowledge, intent or
  consent; examples of such intermediaries include transparent proxies
  or firewalls.

Does this make sense?

Regards,

Hugo

-- 
Hugo Haas - W3C
mailto:hugo@w3.org - http://www.w3.org/People/Hugo/