On Wednesday 22 January 2003 20:30, Michael Young wrote:
<snip>
Sounds fine, but it begs the question of why, if you're going to
introduce a major operationaal change to how PGP signs things, you
don't just change to generating multipart/signed.
<snip>
(I also wouldn't call this an operational change to how PGP signs
things -- the actual signing doesn't change. We're simply talking
about the MIME wrapping done by the mail user agent.)
<snip>
It _is_ an operational change, since the "pre-draft" proposes to label
utf-8 data with us-ascii. MUAs will not be prepared to decode UTF-8
when the Content-Type says "us-ascii"...
Marc
--
They [RIAA,MPAA] are trying to invent a new crime:
interference with a business model.
--Bruce Schneier, Crypto-Gram 08/2002
pgplF8X46NxZQ.pgp
Description: signature