Marco Cimarosti scripsit: > Wow! One octet less than ASCII! :-)
Well, sure. The variable-length encoding represents a mild degree of compression, though it works best for English, being based loosely on English letter frequency statistics. But compression aside, we would expect a scheme that encodes only ~40 characters to do better than ASCII. -- Winter: MIT, John Cowan Keio, INRIA, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Issue lots of Drafts. http://www.ccil.org/~cowan So much more to understand! http://www.reutershealth.com Might simplicity return? (A "tanka", or extended haiku)
