[comp.protocols.iso.x400] O/R-address format on business cards

JPALME@qz.qz.se (Jacob Palme QZ) (08/20/90)

	>>For what it's worth, my $0.02 on X.400 addressing:  From what I
	>>percieve as being proposed as required address formats for input
	>>by humans to send mail to other humans it is *completely
	>>ridiculous*.  For use by computers, fine.  Humans???  Wake up.
	>>It looks like something a first year CS student would
	>>hack up for one of his projects.

	>>In my view electronic mail addressing formats should converge to
	>>those	used to address ordinary physical mail, the kind you put
	>>stamps on and	put in the mail box on the corner.
	>>Do you see ordinary people getting into "C=SE; ADMD=TEDE; PRMD=QZ"?

That the OR-address format in X.400 is very difficult for non-experts to
use is wellknown. I am however not sure if the comment above is

(a) A comment on whether the X.400 OR-address format is human-friendly
    or not.

(b) A comment on whether the proposed business card format for writing
    OR-addresses, given their present definition, is human-friendly
    or not.

It is important to distinguish between these two alternatives, since
the OR-address format has been a standard since 1984, and is (unfortu-
nately) very difficult to change now, while the business card format
can still be changed, if someone can come up with a better alternative.

davecb@nexus.yorku.ca (David Collier-Brown) (08/22/90)

JPALME@qz.qz.se (Jacob Palme QZ) writes:
[in a discussion of the OR-format address]
quoth someone:
>	>>For what it's worth, my $0.02 on X.400 addressing:  From what I
>	>>percieve as being proposed as required address formats for input
>	>>by humans to send mail to other humans it is *completely
>	>>ridiculous*.  For use by computers, fine.  Humans???

jpalme saith:
>That the OR-address format in X.400 is very difficult for non-experts to
>use is wellknown. I am however not sure if the comment above is

>(a) A comment on whether the X.400 OR-address format is human-friendly
>    or not.
>(b) A comment on whether the proposed business card format for writing
>    OR-addresses, given their present definition, is human-friendly
>    or not.

 or (c), the linearized form for use by non-programmatic mail users.

  The discussion of a business-card form is, IMHO, at best a matter of
typography and at worst a red herring.  Indeed, as is the OR-address in
any strictly human context.

  Can we return to discussing the MUA, please?

--dave
--
David Collier-Brown,  | davecb@Nexus.YorkU.CA, ...!yunexus!davecb or
72 Abitibi Ave.,      | {toronto area...}lethe!dave
Willowdale, Ontario,  | "And the next 8 man-months came up like
CANADA. 416-223-8968  |   thunder across the bay" --david kipling