On 02/27/2011 12:21 PM, Robert J. Hansen wrote: > On 2/26/11 9:24 PM, Jameson Rollins wrote: >> http://josefsson.org/inline-openpgp-considered-harmful.html > > * IT DOESN'T HANDLE ATTACHMENTS. That's fine with me: 95%+ of my > messages don't require attachments. Any technology that can hit 95% of > the use case is fine by me. > > * IT DOESN'T LIKE CHARACTER ENCODINGS. Works fine for me with Latin-1 > and UTF-8. > > * FORMAT=FLOWED DOESN'T WORK RELIABLY. I don't use format=flowed in the > first place. > > ... and so on and so on. When I look at the objections to inline PGP, > the more I realize inline PGP hits the sweet spot for me and for a great > many other users.
How about "inline confuses users who don't know anything about OpenPGP"? David _______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
