As I recall (and this was a hot topic for me and others around 1990, especially at the SHARE conference) "CP 37 v2" was what customers called the corrected version of Codepage 37.
Codepage 37 was an excellent attempt by IBM to capture standard practice at the time (in the US) along with full alignment between EBCDIC and ISO-8859-1 (Western Europe). But it _missed on three code points_ (actually six when you count the reflexives): open square bracket, close square bracket, and logical not. IBM are sticklers for the rules. Strictly speaking, ASCII had a logical not, so EBCDIC logical not (CP 37 logical not) got mapped to ISO-8859-1 0xAC. Standard usage would have mapped CP 37 logical not to ASCII 0x5E. Therefore CP 37 v2 did exactly that: mapped its "not" to 0x5E on the ASCII/ISO side. ASCII 0x5E is actually circumflex or "hat", not "not". I imagine the IBMers said, "that's not not" so didn't go there, even though that's where ALL (effectively) customers went when translating A/E or E/A. So CP 37 v2 was customer fix-up. Does this make sense? Same then goes for the square brackets (and their mis-mapped counterparts). IBM introduced Codepage 1047 which GETS BRACKETS RIGHT. I forget, as I write this, if CP 1047 gets not/circumflex right and I'm having trouble pulling the codepages out of Wikipedia. But CP 1047 is GOOD. Basically, CP 1047 is IBM listening and embracing "CP 37 v2" because they had to. Use CP 1047 and pretend CP 37 v2 doesn't exist. Does that help? -- R; <>< On 9/15/20 5:49 PM, Glenn Knickerbocker wrote: > Somebody pointed out today that a mass purge of Wikipedia EBCDIC code > page articles was done in July (with a move to Wikibooks begun but not > finished). For the most part, the objection was that they simply > reproduced information from primary sources. 037-2 seems like an > exception, unacknowledged by the primary sources until the Author's > Edition info made it into the z/VM 6.4 doc. Any Wikipedians here agree > that 037-2 deserves an article, and know where to find more references > for it than I do? > >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2020_September_15#EBCDIC_037-2 > Google Groups has some mentions on the ASSEMBLER-LIST LISTSERV archived. > I'm wondering if there's published discussion from SHARE that could > fill in more. > > ¬^R -- -- R; <><
