On 2018-02-09, at 13:32:29, Seymour J Metz wrote:

> I would argue that EBCDIC is intrinsically superior to ASCII. I would also 
> argue that it is not intrinsically superior to, e.g., ISO-8859-15.
Let's not compare an apple to an orange grove.  I know you insist on precision;
that ASCII is a 7-bit character set and ISO-8859-15 is a particular 8-bit
superset of ASCII.

But what's EBCDIC?  It's at least a family of character sets.  The one that
corresponds closely to ISO-8859-15 is probably IBM1148.  But "ASCII" is widely
used casually for ASCII-based character sets.  See:

Can you suggest a more convenient term encompassing the CCSIDs called "ASCII" on
that page, less cumbersome than "ASCII-based character set" or "ASCII 
used once in that document?

-- gil

Reply via email to