Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mailrus!uwmcsd1!ig!agate!helios.ee.lbl.gov!lll-tis!cwi.nl!piet
From: piet@cwi.nl (Piet Beertema)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.iso.x400.gateway
Subject: Re: Avoid blanks...
Message-ID: <8809220833.AA07248@sering.cwi.nl>
Date: 22 Sep 88 11:33:51 GMT
References: 
Sender: root@tis.llnl.gov
Distribution: inet
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 21
Approved: post-x400-gateway@tis.llnl.gov


	I agree with Tommy that blanks are indee needed and used want we them
	or not.  So a way have to be found to live with them and not to try to
	deny the problem like Piet does.
I don't want to deny the problem, I just want to
avoid it wherever possible. And, as said, I just
fail to see any good reason for including blanks
in a number of cases, like "gold 400". I think the
technicians *must* make it clear to the politicians
that they can *not* have everything they want ("we
choose this, they'll take care of it).

	In our current gateway to a commercial mail network we succesfully map
	blanks to _s and I don't see why such mapping coudn't be made an
	explicit part of the recommendation.
Blank-to-underscore mapping is indeed very common;
lots of mailers include it. For that very reason
you can address me as "Piet_Beertema@cwi.nl".


	Piet