Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!mit-eddie!ll-xn!ames!lll-tis!CS.UCL.AC.UK!steve
From: steve@CS.UCL.AC.UK (Steve Kille)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.iso.x400.gateway
Subject: Re: X.400 Notation
Message-ID: <2064.591260407@UK.AC.UCL.CS>
Date: 26 Sep 88 09:00:07 GMT
References: <5567:denise@priam.cern>
Sender: root@tis.llnl.gov
Distribution: inet
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 13
Approved: post-x400-gateway@tis.llnl.gov


Can I briefly restate my preferred solution (which is somewhere between
Daniel's 1 and 2).  Essentially you should use RFC 987, except for the
syntax of the separators (/=), which is substantially constrained by RFC
822.  The (;= + folding) syntax is much easier on the eyes, and more natural
to the naiive user.  Provided that we can state that the translation is
ENITIRELY mechanical (almost is not good enough), it might just be possible
to get the best of both worlds.  

BTW - whatever the preamble says, if this note is widely agreed, it will
have a strong influence on user interfaces.

Steve