Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!ucla-cs!ucivax!gateway
From: Stef@ics.uci.edu (Einar Stefferud)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.iso.x400
Subject: Re: O/R name component ordering (was: Report from X.400 development
Message-ID: <6034.677564475@nma.com>
Date: 22 Jun 91 05:35:20 GMT
Reply-To: mhsnews@ics.uci.edu
Lines: 32
Approved: usenet@ics.uci.edu
In-reply-to: Your message of 21 Jun 91 13:12:48 +0000.
             <9106210612.aa00770@ics.uci.edu>

More to the point of the problem with changing things at this point,
there are service providers and vendors with hundreds and thousands of
systems in the field that will need upgrading one way or another over
time.

As Piet noted, this is not research any more.  As I like to note:

	"Gee Toto, I don't think we are in Academia any more!"

While I am in here -- Does anyone have any idea as to how much use
will be made of the Terminal Identifier and the User Agent Numeric
Indentifier atributes of the ORADdress?

Extracting from the CCITT Draft text, I am referring to these two
specific ORAddress attributes:

There are 3 categories of attributes: those which may be used in
commonly-used O/R addresses (eg on business cards), those used in
physical delivery addresses, and other specialised attributes (network
address, user agent numeric ID and terminal identifier).
         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

User Agent Numeric ID                   N-ID
Terminal Identifier                     T-ID

Some implementor has asked me this question, wondering whether to do
the work of enabling their entry now, or not.  One problem I see is
that a user interface that prompts for all the odd attributes is going
to drive the users crazy!  The regular atributes are more than enough
already!

Any comments will be welcome...\Stef