4 ms·

There is more to it. For example, note that the numerals map to their direct binary notation plus a 011 in front. 0 => ...0000, 1 => ...0001, 2 => ...0010, etc

by qznc 10y ago

There is more to it. For example, note that the numerals map to their direct binary notation plus a 011 in front. 0 => ...0000, 1 => ...0001, 2 => ...0010, etc. Now I wonder, why don't they start in the zero row? In other words, why is 0 = 0110000, instead of 0100000? Why are the parens not in the same row as braces and brackets? Why isn't "&" (ligature of "et") not in the same row as "e"? "$" ("dollar") is in the same row as "d".

pvg 10y ago
You have a typo in the code for zero, it doesn't end with 1. The reason 0 can't be 0100000 is that's the start of the printable characters and an established standard/requirement was that space collate below all other printable characters. So you have to start with space, you can't put 0 there.
kps 10y ago
The 1963 standard⁰ answers your questions. (Probably the final 1967 version does too, but it's not online anywhere.) In this instance the more common 8-column presentation actually better reflects the design. It's important that the low 4 bits of '0' are 0. The 0x2X column and 0x3X column are related by shift (on some devices²). ⁰ http://worldpowersystems.com/archives/codes/X3.4-1963/index.html http://worldpowersystems.com/archives/codes/X3.4-1963/index.... ¹ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary-coded_decimal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary-coded_decimal ² https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bit-paired_keyboard https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bit-paired_keyboard
- hackuser 10y ago
  > Probably the final 1967 version does too, but it's not online anywhere. Is this it? http://worldpowersystems.com/archives/codes/Revised-ASCII/index.html http://worldpowersystems.com/archives/codes/Revised-ASCII/in...
  - kps 10y ago
    Unfortunately that's just an article on the changes in the new version.
danielweber 10y ago
> Why isn't "&" (ligature of "et") not in the same row as "e"? "$" ("dollar") is in the same row as "d". It matches old mechanical typewriters. I have one with the shift-characters over the numbers being exactly what was 16 characters (one bit flip) away in the table.
jcoffland 10y ago
And why isn't the octothorpe in the same row as "o"?

by qznc 10y ago

pvg 10y ago

You have a typo in the code for zero, it doesn't end with 1. The reason 0 can't be 0100000 is that's the start of the printable characters and an established standard/requirement was that space collate below all other printable characters. So you have to start with space, you can't put 0 there.

kps 10y ago

The 1963 standard⁰ answers your questions. (Probably the final 1967 version does too, but it's not online anywhere.) In this instance the more common 8-column presentation actually better reflects the design. It's important that the low 4 bits of '0' are 0. The 0x2X column and 0x3X column are related by shift (on some devices²). ⁰ http://worldpowersystems.com/archives/codes/X3.4-1963/index.html http://worldpowersystems.com/archives/codes/X3.4-1963/index.... ¹ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary-coded_decimal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary-coded_decimal ² https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bit-paired_keyboard https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bit-paired_keyboard

hackuser 10y ago
> Probably the final 1967 version does too, but it's not online anywhere. Is this it? http://worldpowersystems.com/archives/codes/Revised-ASCII/index.html http://worldpowersystems.com/archives/codes/Revised-ASCII/in...
- kps 10y ago
  Unfortunately that's just an article on the changes in the new version.

danielweber 10y ago

> Why isn't "&" (ligature of "et") not in the same row as "e"? "$" ("dollar") is in the same row as "d". It matches old mechanical typewriters. I have one with the shift-characters over the numbers being exactly what was 16 characters (one bit flip) away in the table.

jcoffland 10y ago

And why isn't the octothorpe in the same row as "o"?