When examining whether or not a claim is to be put in the form provided for in Rule 29(1), second sentence, it is important to assess whether this form is "appropriate". In this respect it should be borne in mind that the purpose of the two-part form is to allow the reader to see clearly which features necessary for the definition of the claimed subject-matter are, in combination, part of the prior art. If this is sufficiently clear from the indication of prior art made in the description, to meet the requirement of Rule 27(1)(b), the two-part form should not be insisted upon.