Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!usc!jarthur!ucivax!gateway
From: JPALME@qz.qz.se (Jacob Palme QZ)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.iso.x400
Subject: References or Relations??
Message-ID: <575187*JPALME@QZ.qz.se>
Date: 1 Jan 91 22:42:14 GMT
Lines: 14
Approved: usenet@ICS.UCI.EDU
Autoforwarded: true

The X.420 attribute which in the 1984 version of X.400 was called
"cross references" did in the 1988 version of X.400 change name
to "related-IPMs".

Does anyone know why this change was made? I think the old term
was better for two reasons:

(a) The term "references" is used in RFC822 for the same heading
field.

(b) "related" will for most non-technical people lead their thoughts
to family relationships. Escpecially the word "relations" will
easily lead your thoughts to family relations, and "references"
would thus be a better term.