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