Information Technology — Text Communication — Message-Oriented Text Interchange Systems (MOTIS) — Part 2: Overall Architecture — Amendment 1

Technologies de l'information — Communication de texte — Systèmes d'échange de texte en mode message — Partie 2: Architecture générale — Amendement 1

General Information

Status
Withdrawn
Publication Date
25-May-1994
Withdrawal Date
25-May-1994
Current Stage
9599 - Withdrawal of International Standard
Completion Date
30-Dec-1996
Ref Project

Relations

Buy Standard

Standard
ISO/IEC 10021-2:1990/Amd 1:1994
English language
7 pages
sale 15% off
Preview
sale 15% off
Preview

Standards Content (Sample)

I NTE R NAT1 O N AL ISO/IEC
STANDARD 10021-2
First edition
1990-12-01
AMENDMENT 1
1994-06-01
Information technology - Text Communication -
Message-Oriented Text Interchange Systems
(MOTS) -
Part 2:
Overall Architecture
AMENDMENT 1: Represemation of O/R addresses
for human exchange
Technologies de l'information - Communication de texte - Systèmes d'échange
de texte en mode message -
Partie 2 :Architecture générale
AMENDEMENT 1: Représentation d'adresses émission/réception pour échanges
entre personnes
Reference number
ISO/IEC 1 O021 -2: 1990/Amd. 1 : 1994(E)

---------------------- Page: 1 ----------------------
ISOfiEC 10021-2:1990/Amd.l: 1994(E)
Foreword
IS0 (the International Organization for Standardization) and IEC (the Inter-
national Electrotechnical Commission) form the specialized system for worldwide
standardization. National bodies that are members of IS0 or IEC participate in the
development of International Standards through technical committees established
by the respective organization to deal with particular fields of technical activity.
IS0 and IEC technical committees collaborate in fields of mutual interest. Other
international organizations, governmental and non-governmental, in liaison with
IS0 and IEC, also take part in the work.
In the field of information technology, IS0 and IEC have established a joint
technical committee, ISO/IEC JTC 1. Draft International Standards adopted by the
joint technical committee are circulated to national bodies for voting. Publication
as an International Standard requires approval by at least 75 % of the national
bodies casting a vote.
Amendment 1 to International Standard ISOAEC 10021-2: 1990 was prepared by
Joint Technical Committee ISOAEC JTC 1, Information technology.
0 ISO/IEC 1994
All rights reserved. Unless otherwise specified, no part of this publication may be
reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including
and microfilm, without permission in writing from the publisher.
photocopying
ISO/IEC Copyright Office Case postale 56 CH-121 1 GenBve 20 Switzerland
Printed in Switzerland

---------------------- Page: 2 ----------------------
ISOfiEC 10021-2: 1990/Amd.l: 1994(E)
Information technology - Text communication - Message-
Oriented Text Interchange Systems (MOTIS) -
Part 2:
Overall Architecture
AMENDMENT 1: Representation of OR addresses for human
.I exchange
Page 51
Subclause 18.5
At the end of the fourth paragraph add a new sentence:
The representation of O/R addresses for human usage is described in Annex F.
il) Renumber existing annexes F and G to G and H, and insert new annex F.
Revise all references to annexes F and G to become G and H respectively.
1

---------------------- Page: 3 ----------------------
ISO/IEC 10021-2 : 1990/Amd. : 1994 (E)
Annex F
(informative)
Representatim of O/R Addresses for Human Usage
F.l Purpose
An O/R address (specified in clause 18) consists of a set of values of attributes taken from the list shown in Table F.l. In
order to represent visually an address to a human user, and to enable the user to enter the address into a user interface, each
attribute value needs to be associated with the correct attribute type. Many of the names of attribute types shown in Table F. 1
are too long for convenient usage on paper or a screen. There is a need for a format which allows attributes to be represented
concisely, e.g., on a business card.
This annex specifies how addresses can be expressed concisely using labels to represent the attribute types. There are three
categories of attributes: those standard mnemonic attributes which are most likely to be found in O/R addresses represented
for human usage (e.g., on business cards), those used in physical delivery addresses, and other specialised attributes
(including domain defined attributes). In order to provide a format which is as concise as possible, many of the labels are e
single characters. This also makes them less language dependent.
Clause F.3 specifies the format for the representation of addresses, and clause F.4 specifies the characteristics necessary for
user interfaces which are intended to be used in conjunction with this format.
F.2 Scope
A labelled format for the communication of O/R addresses to human users is specified. The format consists of a set of pairs of
labels and atîribute-values. The characteristics of a user interface which are necessary to accept addresses given in this format
are also specified.
In addition a self-explanatory format is specified which is suitable for use where there is more space, e.g., in printed material
And in the user interface.
F.3 Format
F.3.1 General
The objective of the labelled format is to enable O/R addresses to be represented in a format which is concise and which can
be accurately transcribed by human users. This can be facilitated by careful consideration of which attributes and values are
used to form an O/R address.
If the attributes of an O/R address include characters from an extended character set, human users who do not normally use
the same extended character set may have difficulty representing the O/R address or entering it into their messaging system.
In this situation, an alias of the O/R address should be provided which is composed entirely of Printable String characters.
NOTES
1 - The policy for structuring O/R addresses needs to be carefully considered. Individual O/R addresses should be allocated within an
appropriate division of the address space to reduce to an acceptable level the probability that two users might expect to have the same
O/R address. Use of given name or initials is usually sufficient to distinguish between users. It may be inappropriate to reflect too much
granularity in organizational-unit-names particularly if the organizational structure is subject to frequent change, or users move between
organizational-units.
2 - There may be a conflict between the benefits of using long values for attributes which are self explanatoq (such as the full name of an
organization) and the benefits of shorter values (e.g., to fit concisely on a business card). One solution to this problem is to provide an
alternative short attribute value (such as the initials of the organization) as an alias for the long value.
2

---------------------- Page: 4 ----------------------
ISO/IEC 10021-2 : 1990/Amd.l: 1994 (E)
3 - If a human user might be uncertain about the existence of a space in an attribute value (particularly when it is typeset), aliases could be
provided with and without the space (e.g., "SNOMAIi.400" as an alias for "SNOMAL400' and "MacDonald" as an alias for
"MacDonald").
4 - If an alias is provided for an O/R address, it is desirable that this is implemented in such a way that a consistent (preferred) form of
O/R address is generated for all messages originated by the user.
Where national usage permits a single space value for the administration-domain-name in an address, this is represented in the
address either by omitting the administration-domain-name attribute, or by showing the administration-domain-name attribute
with no value or the value of a space.
F.3.2 Labelled format
F.3.2.1 Syntax
O/R addresses in labelled format consist of delimited pairs of labels and values in the syntax

Questions, Comments and Discussion

Ask us and Technical Secretary will try to provide an answer. You can facilitate discussion about the standard in here.