bytes vs. octets Alex Shinn (15 Sep 2004 09:01 UTC)
Re: bytes vs. octets bear (15 Sep 2004 16:26 UTC)
Re: bytes vs. octets Alex Shinn (16 Sep 2004 00:17 UTC)
Re: bytes vs. octets Thomas Bushnell BSG (15 Sep 2004 18:54 UTC)
Re: bytes vs. octets Alex Shinn (16 Sep 2004 00:28 UTC)
Re: bytes vs. octets Thomas Bushnell BSG (16 Sep 2004 01:01 UTC)
Re: bytes vs. octets Alex Shinn (16 Sep 2004 01:52 UTC)
Re: bytes vs. octets Thomas Bushnell BSG (16 Sep 2004 02:15 UTC)
Re: bytes vs. octets Per Bothner (16 Sep 2004 04:18 UTC)

Re: bytes vs. octets Thomas Bushnell BSG 15 Sep 2004 18:53 UTC

Alex Shinn <xxxxxx@synthcode.com> writes:

> I've given it a lot of thought and have decided to stick to *-byte in
> the names as there is simply no advantage in changing to octet.  In
> this day and age "byte" is universally accepted as being 8 bits and
> any argument that it could be misinterpreted is simply not
> realistic.

What do you mean my "universally accepted", given that you have seen
it not accepted on this very list?

Thomas