Russell McMahon wrote:
> A "solution" to the "problem" would be for Justin not to digitally sign his 
> messages to the list. As OE is quite likely the largest single browser used 
> this would be a quick way of getting his messages read. There is probably a 
> better method which allows signing and OE display. I'll wait until the 
> answerings die down and then see if there's anything obvious in what i get.

The problems with standards for digital e-mail signatures have been 
going on for years.

Some programs are intelligent and can render pretty much any digital 
signature (inline, MIME-multipart, and other standards) and figure them 
out.  OE and Outlook live off in their own little world that only does 
one type that's not really documented anywhere in an RFC.  Still others 
(mutt on Unix comes to mind) refuse to code in anything that isn't an 
RFC-agreed-to-standard.  Still others rely on PGP-inline ASCII-armored 
keys they just put in their Signature files.

And people wonder why digital signatures never took off.  Testosterone 
apparently played a large role.  Engineers pissing on each other's 
Wheaties if they didn't like the way the other guy did it.   Which lead 
to users bickering about how it "looks" on their screens, which leads to 
everyone just turning the silly things off.

Nate Duehr, nate@natetech.com

_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist