[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       gnupg-users
Subject:    Re: Are .ems attachments necessary?
From:       Ingo =?iso-8859-1?q?Kl=F6cker?= <ingo.kloecker () epost ! de>
Date:       2004-02-06 1:26:18
Message-ID: 200402060226.20976 () erwin ! ingo-kloecker ! de
[Download RAW message or body]

[Attachment #2 (multipart/signed)]


On Friday 06 February 2004 01:47, Todd wrote:
> W. D. wrote:
> > I just joined this group a few days ago, and am finding that some
> > of the email messages are contained in .ems attachments.  I don't
> > understand why this is necessary.  Can't the text be put in the
> > body of email?
>
> Those message do contain text/plain message bodies.  Your MUA is
> simply not displaying them as such because it does not support the
> PGP/MIME RFCs, 2015 and 3156, the latter of which supersedes the
> former.

I just want to remark that any MIME-compliant (RFCs 2045-2048) email 
client is able to display multipart/signed messages correctly. Outlook 
Express is not MIME-compliant (which is the main reason why the 
deprecated clearsigning is still used nowadays). And at least Eudora 
5.1 also seems to have problems with MIME-compliance.

Regards,
Ingo

[Attachment #5 (application/pgp-signature)]

_______________________________________________
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]