Since EBCDIC is a specific encoding for text glyphs, I would have to
agree with Frank that specifying "EBCDIC" certainly should imply one is
discussing "text" data. I have no idea if documentation on z/OS FTP
explicitly states that or not; but if its usage there is not intended to
imply text data, then this parameter value is mis-named.
Joel C. Ewing
On 12/30/2013 03:03 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Dec 2013 12:37:36 -0800, Frank Swarbrick wrote:
>
> Is there any reason why I would not prefer "binary/record" over
> "ebcdic/blocked"?� The former seems to make much more sense, since that
> is in fact what I am doing.� Specifying EBCDIC implies a text file,
> which this is not (even though it does appear to work).
>
> I don't see much difference. Neither handles empty records properly.
>
> Where do you read that "Specifying EBCDIC implies a text file?"
>
> -- gil
>
--
Joel C. Ewing,Bentonville, AR jcew...@acm.org
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
