Philippe. Les messages non sollicit�s (spams) ne sont pas tol�r�s. Tout abus sera signal� automatiquement � vos fournisseurs de service. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim Allan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2003 2:54 AM Subject: Re: Hexadecimal never again
> Ben Dougall wrote about what is used for hex characters: > > > which'll be whatever characters happen to be used to represent those > > sections of the character set on their machines: 0x30 - 0x39, 0x41 - > > 0x46 and 0x61 - 0x66. > > Not in EBCDIC (and other older character sets) they aren't. There are a > lot of mainframe systems still using EBCDIC encodings. And probably some remaining devices using 5-bit or 6-bit encodings... Unicode does not specify encodings out of the UTF-* series. I do think that there may also exist some EBCDIC-based transform for Unicode similar to UTF-8, except that the UTF-8 bytes are remapped to their basic EBCDIC codes (those that do not depend on locale variants, and correspond to ASCII bytes and a few EBCDIC "C1" codes), using the holes to remap the missing byte values needed to represent the full range of UTF-8 encoding byte values 0x00 to 0xFB.
