-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
>> * My email has a much better chance of reaching people whose >> systems bounce (or discard!) attachments. > Are there really a lot of such systems? I've encountered very few > that bounce messages with attachments, and if they discard attachments > then your message is still intact, just unsigned. I should have said "whose systems bounce (or discard!) emails with attachments." > * It is easy to transfer my message to another format (such as a > webpage) while keeping the signature. > Keeping it, perhaps. Keeping it intact, not so much. Any > reformatting done by a web browser (which is perfectly legitimate for > the browser to do) will break the signature, of course. If you force > the formatting with <pre> tags, you've made a concession which allows > the MIME version to work equally well. Well, of course one uses a PRE tag, that was implied. And I don't see how the MIME version works equally well - how would you verify a webpage dump of a MIME stream? > I see your points, but in my opinion they aren't worth giving up the > benefits of MIME -- especially in what one hopes will be a generally > applicable standard. The ability to sign attachments gracefully isn't > the only plus, for example, but that alone seems to be enough to make > MIME a clear winner. I'm not arguing giving up MIME at all - there are situations where it is indispensable, and I even use it on some occasions. But I did want to counter the "inline is evil and should never ever be used by anyone" argument. :) - -- Greg Sabino Mullane [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP Key: 0x14964AC8 200508091124 https://www.biglumber.com/x/web?pk=2529DF6AB8F79407E94445B4BC9B906714964AC8 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iEYEARECAAYFAkL4yukACgkQvJuQZxSWSshZfACgic4eyzK3o/5eUgaplSqJ7r2/ 4KsAn1O91MNfSYdjHnnc5C3D5yV90+P7 =X/XW -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
