my-comments: decompress #{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}
alan parman wrote:
> Terry,
> Sounds great! Would have many uses where text is the medium (html, REBOL scripts,
>e-mail, etc).
>
> However, I will remain politely skeptical until I see it in action.
> While I don't have much experience with the mechanics of compression, I have read
>some about it.
> And from that I am heartened by your description of giving better compression for a
>specific type of file ("This works only for communication using standard english
>words..."). _A_Lot_ of work has been done in this area, and _many_ claims of a
>better system have been proven false. But, many compression schemes are tuned for
>_any_ type of file (standard zip , PKZIP WinZip etc), so claims for a better system
>for a specific type of file are plausible.
>
> I am openly skeptical about your (implied) claim that you can greatly compress an
>already compressed file ("If a better compression system than winzip is used, then
>the 213 would be even smaller."). While not impossible, I would like to see if it is
>a general phenomenon for any English text file.
>
> Can it be tuned for REBOL scripts?
>
> I've been toying with using huffman-encoding (thanks RebolForces!) on the level of
>words instead of characters. Is this similar to your scheme?
> --
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sign-up for your own FREE Personalized E-mail at Mail.com
> http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list, please send an email to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" in the
> subject, without the quotes.
--
Note: When sending me email directly, always make sure to include my name
in the message, otherwise my aggressive spam filters may trash it.
Ryan Cole * www.iesco-dms.com * 707-468-5400
--
To unsubscribe from this list, please send an email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" in the
subject, without the quotes.
