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)

Re: binary vs non-binary ports Per Bothner 20 Sep 2004 02:46 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/