It's clearly not just about authorial intent. Authorial intent is only one of many problems in translating. When poetry gets translated these other factors are even more apparent. Word flow, the sound of certain phrases and how a translation is stylistically executed are as important, or even more important, than simple considerations of authorial intent.

The "broken" bridle point in the article is more a question of how cluttered and encumbered a simple French sentence should become in English. The dancing Salome point is a question of whether or not to explain a cultural reference via footnote (and break the scene flow), explain it by changing what is written or to just let it slip by the reader's attention and lose a bit of metaphor.

Most of the questions raised in the article have little to do with intent and much more to do with replicating stylistic devices (or not) and trying to find the right balance between literal translation and sentence flow in the second language. Did you read the article or just skim it?