Re: opinion: "upgrade" use of CCSID in JCL.

On 3 September 2015 at 21:25, Paul Gilmartin <000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > On Thu, 3 Sep 2015 19:02:15 +, Don Williams wrote: > >>So I'm not the only person to think that options to control translation >>might be useful. Choice of code page would be good. Ability to

Re: opinion: "upgrade" use of CCSID in JCL.

On Thu, 3 Sep 2015 19:02:15 +, Don Williams wrote: >So I'm not the only person to think that options to control translation >might be useful. Choice of code page would be good. Ability to exclude >BDW/RDW from translation would be nice too. > In: z/OS 2.1.0>z/OS DFSMS>z/OS DFSMS Using Data Se

Re: opinion: "upgrade" use of CCSID in JCL.

In , on 09/03/2015 at 07:02 PM, Don Williams said: >So I'm not the only person to think that options to control >translation might be useful. Choice of code page would be good. >Ability to exclude BDW/RDW from translation would be nice too. Nice? It's essential tha t BDW/RDW be excluded from

Re: opinion: "upgrade" use of CCSID in JCL.

In , on 09/03/2015 at 12:15 PM, John McKown said: >(which should propagate to QSAM since I think (hope?) >that QSAM is just a layer over BSAM). It isn't, nor should it be. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT ISO position; see

Re: opinion: "upgrade" use of CCSID in JCL.

In , on 09/03/2015 at 09:04 AM, John McKown said: > DB is an ASCII-only RECFM which is similar to VB, but has some >strange other characteristics. It is not really "new". It is >currently only supported for ASCII format, tape resident data, using >OPTCD=Q OPTCD=Q only requests translation, Yo

Re: opinion: "upgrade" use of CCSID in JCL.

In <4063583177453129.wa.paulgboulderaim@listserv.ua.edu>, on 09/03/2015 at 08:39 AM, Paul Gilmartin <000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> said: >"DB"? Hmmm. Another RECFM might require an extension area for >DCBRECFM. It's been there for decades, but it's documented as tape on

Re: opinion: "upgrade" use of CCSID in JCL.

On Thu, 3 Sep 2015 19:02:15 +, Don Williams wrote: >So I'm not the only person to think that options to control translation >might be useful. Choice of code page would be good. Ability to exclude >BDW/RDW from translation would be nice too. > OK. I see: z/OS 2.1.0>z/OS MVS>z/OS MVS JCL Refer

Re: opinion: "upgrade" use of CCSID in JCL.

So I'm not the only person to think that options to control translation might be useful. Choice of code page would be good. Ability to exclude BDW/RDW from translation would be nice too. On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 1:16 PM John McKown wrote: > On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 11:36 AM, Paul Gilmartin < > 0

Re: opinion: "upgrade" use of CCSID in JCL.

On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 11:36 AM, Paul Gilmartin < 000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > On 2015-09-03, at 08:04, John McKown wrote: > > > >> Wny not DD CCSID=...,PATH=...? A field for CCSID is available in the > tag. > > > >​Right. A part and parcel of the whole package. Extend

Re: opinion: "upgrade" use of CCSID in JCL.

On 2015-09-03, at 08:04, John McKown wrote: > >> Wny not DD CCSID=...,PATH=...? A field for CCSID is available in the tag. > >​Right. A part and parcel of the whole package. Extend BSAM/QSAM to honour >CCSID on the JOB and DD for any input or output source, not just ASCII >tapes. ​ > I understand

Re: opinion: "upgrade" use of CCSID in JCL.

On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 9:24 AM, Paul Gilmartin < 000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > On Thu, 3 Sep 2015 09:04:38 -0500, John McKown wrote: > > > >​DB is an ASCII-only RECFM which is similar to VB, but has some strange > >other characteristics. It is not really "new". It is cur

Re: opinion: "upgrade" use of CCSID in JCL.

On Thu, 3 Sep 2015 09:04:38 -0500, John McKown wrote: > >​DB is an ASCII-only RECFM which is similar to VB, but has some strange >other characteristics. It is not really "new". It is currently only >supported for ASCII format, tape resident data, using OPTCD=Q (which is >strictly for ASCII tape res

Re: opinion: "upgrade" use of CCSID in JCL.

On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 8:39 AM, Paul Gilmartin < 000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > On Wed, 2 Sep 2015 14:34:41 -0400, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote: > > > >>I am wondering if anyone else thinks that it might be useful for IBM > >>to make an enhancement to BSAM/QSAM support

Re: opinion: "upgrade" use of CCSID in JCL.

On Wed, 2 Sep 2015 14:34:41 -0400, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote: > >>I am wondering if anyone else thinks that it might be useful for IBM >>to make an enhancement to BSAM/QSAM support for the CCSID parameter >>in JCL. > >Yes. Likewise RECFM=DB ON DASD. > "DB"? Hmmm. Another RECFM might require

Re: opinion: "upgrade" use of CCSID in JCL.

In , on 09/02/2015 at 07:38 AM, John McKown said: >I am wondering if anyone else thinks that it might be useful for IBM >to make an enhancement to BSAM/QSAM support for the CCSID parameter >in JCL. Yes. Likewise RECFM=DB ON DASD. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT ISO

Re: opinion: "upgrade" use of CCSID in JCL.

On Wed, 2 Sep 2015 07:38:11 -0500, John McKown wrote: >I am wondering if anyone else thinks that it might be useful for IBM to >make an enhancement to BSAM/QSAM support for the CCSID parameter in JCL. > >ref: >http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/BOOKS/iea2b6a0/12.9 > > >Purpose >

opinion: "upgrade" use of CCSID in JCL.

I am wondering if anyone else thinks that it might be useful for IBM to make an enhancement to BSAM/QSAM support for the CCSID parameter in JCL. ref: http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/BOOKS/iea2b6a0/12.9 Purpose You can request the access method to convert data between the co