* Chris Green ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [000207 11:49]:
> On Mon, Feb 07, 2000 at 11:50:01AM +0100, Thomas Roessler wrote:
> > On 2000-02-07 09:07:23 +0000, Chris Green wrote:
> >
> > > This is all very well but it's a bit unlikely that every other
> > > MUA in the world is going to get fixed just to satisfy mutt
> > > users.
> >
> > We're not talking aobut satisfying mutt users, but about
> > implementing specifications which are on the Standards Track.
> >
> Yes, I know that, but realistically are the rest of the world's MUAs
> going to become PGP/MIME conformant - ever?
<sarcasm>
You're right, and while we're at it, let's throw out RFC 822 at the
same time. Why should we expect all MUAs to conform to any sort of
standard. If you want to send mail to outlook users, use outlook.
</sarcasm>
There's a reason for the standards track, and I'm not implying that
you don't agree with this, but the only way to make the vendors
conform is to complain.
e.
--
Eric Brunson * _ o * Faster and faster,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] * / //\ until the thrill of speed
[EMAIL PROTECTED] \>>| * overcomes the fear of death
[EMAIL PROTECTED] \\,
PGP signature
