Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!agate!helios.ee.lbl.gov!ncis.tis.llnl.gov!NRTC.NORTHROP.COM!Stef
From: Stef@NRTC.NORTHROP.COM (Einar Stefferud)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.iso.x400.gateway
Subject: Re: New RFC - for UUCP mapping
Message-ID: <13038.617474151@nma.com>
Date: 26 Jul 89 16:35:51 GMT
References: <2226.617460639@UK.AC.UCL.CS>
Sender: root@ncis.tis.llnl.gov
Reply-To: Stef@nrtc.northrop.com
Distribution: inet
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 25
Approved: post-x400-gateway@tis.llnl.gov

Good shot Steve -- I did howver have trouble trying to parse and
understand one paragraph in particular, included next.


>     1.  Introduction
>
>     Some mail networks which use RFC  822  cannot  support  the  full
>     character  set required by all aspects of RFC 822.  This document
>     describes a symmetrical mapping between full RFC 822  addressing,
>     and  a  form for use on these networks.  Any addresses within the
>     networks will not use the full RFC 822  addressing,  and  so  any
>     addresses   encoded   according  to  this  standard  will  always
>     represent remote addresses.

I hesitate to attempt a rewrite it.  I think my trouble stems from the
use of too many pronouns and nonspecific references to vaugue or missing
anticedents.  

Later on you formally speak of "Full RFC822" and "Restricted RFC822" in
table headings.  

How about defining those terms a bit earlier and then using them to
clarify the text.  

Best...\Stef