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