From donn@hpfcrn.fc.hp.com Wed May 1 22:30:27 1991 Received: from hpfcla.fc.hp.com by dkuug.dk via EUnet with SMTP (5.64+/8+bit/IDA-1.2.8) id AA13787; Wed, 1 May 91 22:30:27 +0200 Received: from hpfcrn.fc.hp.com by hpfcla.fc.hp.com with SMTP (15.11.1.6/15.5+IOS 3.20) id AA21302; Wed, 1 May 91 14:28:56 -0600 Received: from hpfcdonn by hpfcrn.HP.COM; Wed, 1 May 91 14:30:24 -0600 Message-Id: <9105012030.AA13247@hpfcrn.HP.COM> To: y.nakahara@ome.toshiba.co.jp (Yasushi Nakahara) Cc: wg15rin@dkuug.dk Subject: Re: (wg15rin 108) Re: new POSIX byte definition (00040) In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 01 May 91 13:47:10 O." <9105010736.AA19187@tis1.tis.toshiba.co.jp> Date: Wed, 01 May 91 14:30:23 MDT From: Donn Terry X-Charset: ASCII X-Char-Esc: 29 With respect to the use of "byte" for interchagne (as Nakahara observes, that's a real problem). I just checked on .1, and it uses "byte" in chapter 10. However, it should have used "octet" a bit more, indicating that 8-bit data was presumed for interchange. (The fact that such 8-bit data might be contained in 9 or 10 bit containers ("bytes") when in memory or on a device that has a larger natural size can/should be ignored.) (I consider that an error, but we have to see how correcting it comes out in balloting.) The new interchange format proposed in .1a (moving to some part of .2) is octet oriented. Donn