Re: Suggestion : New Content-Disposition parameters...

Keith Moore writes:
> seems reasonable at least from a theoretical perspective.  from a 
> practical perspective, I wonder if it's at all realistic to request 
> that email not be archived, or that some part of a message not be 
> archived.
A good question, but I think it's beside the point. If the existing 
non-standard field is reasonably widely used, both by message writers 
and archivers, isn't that in itself reason enough to standadize it?
Is there a single (or a very few) interoperably used fields, in 
practice? I've heard of X-No-Archive and Archive - who supports those 
two?
Arnt