signature as attachment?

Ben Finney
Wed Jul 16 05:58:02 2003

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On 15-Jul-2003, Eddie Roosenmaallen wrote:
> One thing to consider is that if you're corresponding with Windows
> users, they probably can't read PGP/MIME messages. Either the sig will
> be lost (best case), or they will see a blank message (common case).

Slightly better than the "best" case you presented: The attachment is
preserved and shown as an attached file of type

OT: Is it part of the PGP/MIME statndard that the signature should not
have a suggested attachment filename?  I'd think it would make more
sense to give a filename, to avoid having the MUA choose its own
arbitrary name for the attachment.

 \            "There was a point to this story, but it has temporarily |
  `\                 escaped the chronicler's mind."  -- Douglas Adams |
_o__)                                                                  |  F'print 9CFE12B0 791A4267 887F520C B7AC2E51 BD41714B

Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)