Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!mcgill-vision!snorkelwacker!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!orion.oac.uci.edu!ucivax!gateway
From: mr@ritd.co.UK
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.iso.x400
Subject: Re: Printable format (was: Re: ISO/CCITT meeting report)
Message-ID: <1186.9008170736@coyote.ritd.co.uk>
Date: 17 Aug 90 09:28:54 GMT
Lines: 27
Approved: usenet@ICS.UCI.EDU

OK, I can't resist chipping in. I have to say that I am firmly in the
camp of those unhappy with suggested syntaxes. The "XXX=xyz" type I
could just about stomach. The "count the delimeters" type just doesn't
tie in with my own experience of the computer literate, let alone the
rest of the world. Shades of OS/360 JCL (was that 13 commas or 14?).

Regarding the sub-discussion of the merits and problems of current
domain style addressing: I absolutely agree with Piet's comment about
country identifiers. My domain address is mr@ritd.co.uk. This uniquely
identifies me in the world. The upper domain parts seem to me to relate
to ADMD and PRMD concepts, each part having control of the allocation
of names within it's domain. This domain control is what prevents name
conflict and allows this unambiguous naming (I assume that domain
authorities have their act together).

Yet I (as an end user) don't need to know all that (or care). To most
users around here it is a short, *typographically simple* string that is
relatively easy to use and communicate to others. It's the job of our
and other mail handlers to parse such an address "sensibly". Isn't that
why we write software?

        Martin Reed, Racal Imaging Systems Ltd
+----------------------------------------------------------+
|uucp: mr@ritd.co.uk, uunet!ukc!ritd!mr                    | `Just hold
|Global String: +44 256 469943   Fax: +44 256 471492       |  these two
|Paper: Rankine Road, Basingstoke, Hants, England, RG24 0NW|  wires...'
+----------------------------------------------------------+