Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!jarthur!ucivax!gateway
From: pv@eng.sun.COM (Peter Vanderbilt)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.iso.x400
Subject: Re: Teletex ORName attribute representation
Message-ID: <9101041733.AA00947@polya.Eng.Sun.COM>
Date: 4 Jan 91 17:53:48 GMT
Lines: 30
Approved: usenet@ICS.UCI.EDU

> From: JPALME@qz.qz.se (Jacob Palme QZ)

> The general opinion was, I believe, that it is not very important
> to be able to represent a postal address, teletex addres or fax
> address on a business card in a X.400-encoded format, since it
> would be much more natural to present these addresses in the
> normal non-X.400 way of printing these addresses.

Does this imply that the general opinion was that the teletex form of
attributes (like teletex-organization-name or teletex-personal-name)
would not be used in regular (F1 V1) X.400 addresses?

On the other hand, what is the problem with teletex attributes on a
business card?  Wouldn't they be printed in the native language form?
I agree with with Philip (philip@beeblebrox.dle.dg.COM):

>  I had assumed that if the data portion of an attribute contained
>  non-printablestring characters, then it was to be assumed to be in
>  T.61.

However,

>  I must confess that I don't really see how this would work
>  internationally as you are supposed to provide both printable and T.61
>  forms of each attribute.

This requirement has been dropped in version 3 of the MHS implementor's
guide.

Pete