Yesterday I made a remark on this mailing list about how I shouldn't
have borrowed PEM's header syntax for PGP, because this problem of
extra header fields was affecting PGP as well. I think the tone of the
remark came across in email as snide and nasty. It was intended as a
jibe, but not a nasty one. The social chemistry of email tends to
amplify toward offensive directions. I should have shown more
sensitivity to the chemistry of email, and framed it in a more joking
fashion.
I've made bigger mistakes in PGP than this header field problem, even
without borrowing from PEM. An open standards process might have let
this problem through for PEM, but that kind of open process could have
caught some of my other mistakes I made on my own.
prz