Doug Kerr
Well-known member
In the encoding of alphanumeric information, we often use one of three coded character sets:
A. ASCII
B. An "extended ASCII" "code page", often CP-1252, the "Windows western" coded haracter set
C. Unicode
Now, especially in making the distinction between A and B, A is often called "ASCII" and B, "ANSI".
Now that doesn't make any sense, given that:
• ASCII is an ANSI (American National Standards Institute) standard.
• CP-1252 is not an ANSI standard (rather a proprietary standard from Microsoft, never promulgated by any domestic or international standards body).
Now how did this curious situation come about?
Well part of the story is that Microsoft aspired to have CP-1252 adopted as a standard by either ANSI or by ISO (in which case it would have become an ANSI standard by "embrace" - essentially all ISO standards are "embraced" by ANSI, just as a city may automatically embrace a state building code).
In anticipation of that, Microsoft began referring to CP-1252 as "ANSI". Of course even if it had become an ANSI standard, that would not have served to distinguish it from ASCII, which was (also) an ANSI standard.
But in fact, CP-1252 did not become an industry standard (in the sense of promulgation by a standards body). Instead, a somewhat different but closely related character set became ISO-8859-1, and as such, is (by embrace) an ANSI standard. And of course, ASCII is (still) an ANSI standard.
In this office, we refer to the ASCII character set as "ASCII" and the CP-1252 character set as "CP-1252". Fancy that.
Best regards,
Doug
A. ASCII
B. An "extended ASCII" "code page", often CP-1252, the "Windows western" coded haracter set
C. Unicode
Now, especially in making the distinction between A and B, A is often called "ASCII" and B, "ANSI".
Now that doesn't make any sense, given that:
• ASCII is an ANSI (American National Standards Institute) standard.
• CP-1252 is not an ANSI standard (rather a proprietary standard from Microsoft, never promulgated by any domestic or international standards body).
Now how did this curious situation come about?
Well part of the story is that Microsoft aspired to have CP-1252 adopted as a standard by either ANSI or by ISO (in which case it would have become an ANSI standard by "embrace" - essentially all ISO standards are "embraced" by ANSI, just as a city may automatically embrace a state building code).
In anticipation of that, Microsoft began referring to CP-1252 as "ANSI". Of course even if it had become an ANSI standard, that would not have served to distinguish it from ASCII, which was (also) an ANSI standard.
But in fact, CP-1252 did not become an industry standard (in the sense of promulgation by a standards body). Instead, a somewhat different but closely related character set became ISO-8859-1, and as such, is (by embrace) an ANSI standard. And of course, ASCII is (still) an ANSI standard.
In this office, we refer to the ASCII character set as "ASCII" and the CP-1252 character set as "CP-1252". Fancy that.
Best regards,
Doug