From: Philippe Verdy (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Wed Jan 24 2007 - 05:11:59 CST
From: "Frank Ellermann" <email@example.com>
> Maybe. It's legalese, it explicitly says "may". Maybe this
> deponds on living in the U.S. Or maybe it depends on how much
> you've annoyed IBM elsewhere. I'd guess that you're seriously
> in trouble if you claim to have "invented" another profile of
> BOCU (slightly different from BOCU-1).
Which troubles? Isn't BOCU-1 much like ISO 2022 which uses some codes to swtich between multiple small code pages? Will IBM claim that ISO 2022 falls into its invention, despite what it really does is to use a single octet to encoded those switches, instead of (possibly) multiple ones in ISO 2022? Remeber that ISO 2022 contains not only a profile for 7-bit encoding but also a profile for 8-bit encoding, and with that last option, most codepage switches become encoded with a single octet too...
I wonder what is really exclusive to BOCU-1. For me it looks very much like a very simplified version of ISO 2022 (that has been tweaked specially to become incompatible with it, just by removing ISO 2022 conformance requirements, such as the prohibition of some codes).
The exclusive concepts already existed before BOCU-1 (think about SS2, SS3 codes in ISO 8859-1, or even at the SI/SO control codes of ASCII).
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jan 24 2007 - 05:14:34 CST