On Sat, May 05 2012, Yann Hodique wrote:

> The point of using application/emacs-lisp was just to demonstrate
> something that works *today*. text/lisp or text/emacs-lisp would
> definitely be cleaner, but they're not recognized as elisp code by gnus
> as of now.

I'm not sure what yo mean by "not recognized", but for me your example
mail shows with the Emacs Lisp code inlined and font-locked by Gnus. And
the result is indeed cleaner than with tags.

-- 
           Julien