In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 06/28/2006
at 07:31 AM, Paul Gilmartin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>In a recent note, McKown, John said:
>IBM has done its best to confuse us on this point.
No. IBM has done its best[1] to avoid compounding the damage caused by
the original Unix design decisions.
>>IBM for some reason chose NL.
The obvious reason is that NL is new line; that's what it has been
there for since the advent of the S/360. What is bizarre was the Unix
decision to use LF as an NL sequence instead of the traditional CRLF.
>Evidently IBM makes an exception for this case, and implements the
>effect of the OEMVS311 conversion table, which is, as you note,
>quite practical
An output of 153D is practical?
>IBM ought to relieve the confusion and permit technical correctness
>by defining YA code page, identical to IBM-1047 except for having LF
>at 0x15 and NL at 0x25.
What would that do to existing software, especially 3270 software that
must deal with SCS?
[1] On this particular issue. On other issues, ...
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
ISO position; see <http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html>
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
