On Fri, 14 Oct 2016 16:24:18 -0400, Rick Troth wrote:
>The advantage in the non-EBCDIC* world is that the lower half of 8-bit
>space is rather more consistent. And that space is where we have some
>serious trouble on this side of the line (pipe symbol versus
>exclamation, square brackets, curly braces).
At least they should have stabilized the graphemes in the s/360 PrincOps.
But that might still leave conflicts among caret, logical not and pipe, leaky

>... The result of the SHARE effort was what some call
>"Code Page 37 version 2". IBM never fully took-up the customer-produced
>code page, but they did listen and they gave us CP 1047.
Feels as if CP37V2 fell victim to pernicious NIH.  I suspect IBM still doesn't
have a CCSID matching CP37V2.

>CP 1047 is the best we have, if we are to live in the world IBM has
>created for us.
Ref. Elon Musk.

>There is still the problem that a stream of bytes might not be
>recognized. Tagging files with charset ABC or code page 123 is clumsy at
"It's the best we have," but not available for Classic data sets.
The non-EBCDIC world gets along nicely with no tagging and a
presumption of UTF-8.

>This is where even Dignus doesn't quite get it: They translate EBCDIC
>0x15 to non-EBCDIC 0x0A. (Actual non-EBCDIC for "newline" is 0x85.) But
>their table only helps with the above test, and _makes sense_ for cases
>where someone did an un-measured translation. So I can't fault them.
CMS Pipelines (perhaps other CMS utilities) use 0x25 instead of 0x15.
There's some very Bad History behind all this.

>Once the result of the EBCDIC (or not) check is known, one can apply
>locale and "convert" appropriately. i.e., beyond the cramped walls of
>8-bit space.
But one must somehow know locale to differentiate among ISO-8859-x
and UTF-8 and the far greater number of EBCDIC CCSIDs.

>* I say non-EBCDIC here because "ASCII" has baggage for many. Y'all know
>what I mean.
Yes, but he hasn't been active on these lists for several months.

Answering my question earlier in this thread, I used ISPF 3.17
with an IBM-1047 terminal to view a UTF-8 file containing the 1047
character matrix.  Displayed splendidly (Yaaay!)  Then I used the
ISPF Edit Copy command to append another copy of the same file
(same tags, of course).  It appears garbled.  They could have done
better.  If the active file is UTF-8 (pretty universal) and the copied
file is fully tagged, Copy might be expected either to convert it also
to UTF-8 or copy it in literally.  Neither seems to have happened.

-- gil

I suppose I can mail my test data off-list to anyone interested.

For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Reply via email to