From donn@hpfcrn.fc.hp.com Fri Nov 16 18:24:35 1990
Message-Id: <9011161727.AA00929@hpfcrn.HP.COM>
To: wg15rin@dkuug.dk
Subject: Paper, again
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 90 10:27:49 MST
From: Donn Terry <donn@hpfcrn.fc.hp.com>
X-Sequence: wg15rin@dkuug.dk 16
Errors-To: wg15rin-request@dkuug.dk
X-Charset: ASCII
X-Char-Esc: 29

I included Keld's input in this draft.

It's not a lot different.  Several of Keld's comments agreed completely
with what I *intended* to say, but apparently I did not say it clearly
enough.

However, Keld makes a comment about the usefulness of CHAR_BIT:

	Well, I am still not convinced of the merits of CHAR_BIT.
	If CHAR_BIT is set to 8 in the national profile, would that 
	exclude 16 bit charset systems from conforming to the standard?
	That would exclude ISO 6937 based systems in Europe, for instance.

	If not, what good does the CHAR_BIT specification do?

	Actually we were quite careful when specifying the Danish national
	profile not to exclude useful implementations. We did not require
	ISO C, for example. Would specification of CHAR_BIT not lead to
	the same problems?

The problem is that I can't argue with him: I'm not sure I fully understand
what good it is either!

Can anyone help?

Donn