binary vs non-binary ports
Per Bothner
(16 Sep 2004 04:51 UTC)
|
Re: binary vs non-binary ports
Alex Shinn
(16 Sep 2004 05:34 UTC)
|
Re: binary vs non-binary ports
Per Bothner
(16 Sep 2004 06:54 UTC)
|
Re: binary vs non-binary ports
Alex Shinn
(16 Sep 2004 07:26 UTC)
|
Re: binary vs non-binary ports
Shiro Kawai
(16 Sep 2004 08:30 UTC)
|
Re: binary vs non-binary ports
Alex Shinn
(17 Sep 2004 03:43 UTC)
|
Re: binary vs non-binary ports
Alex Shinn
(17 Sep 2004 05:32 UTC)
|
Re: binary vs non-binary ports
Per Bothner
(17 Sep 2004 17:22 UTC)
|
Re: binary vs non-binary ports
Shiro Kawai
(17 Sep 2004 20:44 UTC)
|
Re: binary vs non-binary ports
Hans Oesterholt-Dijkema
(17 Sep 2004 21:26 UTC)
|
Re: binary vs non-binary ports
Alex Shinn
(18 Sep 2004 02:15 UTC)
|
Re: binary vs non-binary ports
Per Bothner
(18 Sep 2004 16:31 UTC)
|
Re: binary vs non-binary ports
Bradd W. Szonye
(18 Sep 2004 17:43 UTC)
|
Re: binary vs non-binary ports
Per Bothner
(18 Sep 2004 19:51 UTC)
|
Re: binary vs non-binary ports
Hans Oesterholt-Dijkema
(18 Sep 2004 18:04 UTC)
|
Re: binary vs non-binary ports
Bradd W. Szonye
(18 Sep 2004 19:21 UTC)
|
Re: binary vs non-binary ports
Alex Shinn
(20 Sep 2004 02:06 UTC)
|
Re: binary vs non-binary ports Per Bothner (20 Sep 2004 02:46 UTC)
|
Re: binary vs non-binary ports
Alex Shinn
(18 Sep 2004 02:21 UTC)
|
Re: binary vs non-binary ports
Per Bothner
(18 Sep 2004 20:04 UTC)
|
Re: binary vs non-binary ports
Hans Oesterholt-Dijkema
(17 Sep 2004 21:37 UTC)
|
Re: binary vs non-binary ports
Hans Oesterholt-Dijkema
(17 Sep 2004 22:40 UTC)
|
Re: binary vs non-binary ports
Hans Oesterholt-Dijkema
(17 Sep 2004 22:48 UTC)
|
Alex Shinn wrote: > At Sat, 18 Sep 2004 09:31:02 -0700, Per Bothner wrote: > >>* Most file formats that mix text and binary i/o do *not* handle >>general strings: often they only support whatever character encoding >>the "creative" engineers are most familiar with. > > I think relatively few formats assume a single encoding. Either they > tend to treat strings agnostically as a sequence of bytes (leaving > encoding interpretation up to the programmer), Which means they only handle a single encoding. > HTTP, MIME, and most internet standards ... HTTP is net work protocol, not a file encoding. MIME is primarily a network protocol, though it also ends up being use for email storage. Network people tend to be more aware of internationalization issues - they have to be. I suspect widely use file formats tend to handle internationalized text, since at least somebody involved with specifyin them will have a basic understanding og internationalization. Home-grown file formats are I suspect more likely to be single-format. In any case this is a side issue, of course. -- --Per Bothner xxxxxx@bothner.com http://per.bothner.com/