Re: New Draft... going forward

[lutz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Lutz Donnerhacke)]

* Gene Hoffman wrote:
>Also, to defend the need for ASCII Armor parsing in a compatable
>application I offer up the API to Exchange/Outlook. This MUA doesn't give
>an application plugin the ability to process MIME attachments. The default
>message interoperability mechanism is ASCII armored encrypted blocks in
>the message body.

Is this true for picture viewers, too?

>I beleive that the benefits given to having MUST understand ASCII armor,
>and SHOULD be able to generate are great compared to the implementation

Current version clarifies it. I hope it is better. "For backward
compatibility this format should be read but may not be generated."

"should" and "may" has a special meaning in RfCs. So it is exactly what you
expect.