RE: TECH-ERROR: Name of SUBMITTER parameter

["Harry Katz" <hkatz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Friday, September 03, 2004 9:20 AM, Matthew.van.Eerde@xxxxxxxxx
wrote:

> wayne wrote:
> > In <16695.45036.160556.552577@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Roy Badami 
> > <roy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> >>     MAIL FROM:<foo@bar> PRA=<baz@qux>
> >> 
> >> is far more natural than the SUBMITTER alternative.
> > So, I think we can count at least four people who would like to see 
> > SUBMITTER= renamed to PRA=.
> 
> I respectfully disagree.  Acronyms are harder to understand 
> than fully-spelled-out names.  A search on AcronymFinder for 
> PRA returned 41 results:
> Paint Research Association (UK)
> Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
> Parabolic Reflector Antenna
> Parti pour le Renouveau Algerien
> Participatory Rural Appraisal
> 
> How about spelling PRA out rather than using the acronym?
> 
> Matthew.van.Eerde@xxxxxxxxx                      805.964.4554 x902
> Hispanic Business Inc./HireDiversity.com         Software Engineer
> perl -e"map{y/a-z/l-za-k/;print}shift" "Jjhi pcdiwtg Ptga wprztg,"
> 

Actually, I prefer the name SUBMITTER and would like to stick with it.
I believe that, from the sender's perspective, the name accurately
conveys what the parameter means.  It is only on the receiving side that
the value becomes "purported."