phipps@fortune.UUCP (Clay Phipps) (05/17/84)
[warning: longish posting: 76 lines]
In my S/360 and 370 days, IBM's point of view was that EBCDIC
was a data *storage* code, and that ASCII was a data *interchange* code.
The following is according to
R. W. Bemer: "A View of the History of the ISO Character Code",
*Honeywell Computer Journal*, p. 274 .. 286.
He should know; he has sometimes been called the "Father of ASCII".
[unattributed quotes are Bemer's own -- CP]
On 1960 Aug. 4, ASA Committee X3.2, "Codes and Input-Output",
held its first meeting.
At the outset, X3.2 assumed that a dense 6-bit code would be devised
(all common computers of the time, except IBM's "Stretch",
were using 6-bit codes).
During 1961 June 7 to 9, X3.2 decided to use a 7-bit code.
In 1962 (March ?), an IBM member of X3.2 explained his "no" vote on X3.2/1
with the statement: "IBM studies have shown that the proposed 7-bit code
with its contiguous alphabet would be expensive to implement
in the present domestic data processing environment oriented to the use
of 6-bit data processors and punched cards".
On 1962 Aug. 17, IBM proposed its prototype of the Extended BCD
Interchange Code (BCD), an 8-bit code, as a de facto standard.
On 1963 June 17, X3.4-1963 [the first version of ASCII -- CP]
was approved as a US standard by ASA.
The 1963 Aug. 7 issue of IBM's *Data Processor* was devoted to ASCII.
It said, "To support ASCII ... IBM plans to provide whatever means
are practical to meet customer needs for using the standard code
as soon as possible, after media standardization is approved by
the American Standards Association. Because standardization
is so important, we have already begun to implement ASCII ...
We as a corporation are determined to move ahead with ASCII
at the most rapid pace possible so that our customers can gain
the benefits of standardization across the industry".
" ... the resistance in X3 ... to an 8-bit code, together with the fact
that the ASCII printer and card reader were not ready
when 360 announcement time neared, led to the decision to make EBCDIC
the primary code. It was reasoned that ASCII could wait until
the matter was settled, at which time the software would be modified
slightly, the P-bit switched to ASCII internal mode, and everything
would be fine. Unfortunately, the software for the 360 was constructed
by thousands of programmers, with great and unexpected difficulties,
and with considerable lack of controls. As a result, the nearly
$300 million worth of software (at first delivery) was filled with coding
that depended upon the EBCDIC representation to work ...
IBM indeed made an estimate of how much it would cost to provide
a reworked set of software to run under ASCII. The figure was $5 million,
actually negligible compared to base cost. However, IBM made the decision
not to take that action, and from this time the worldwide position of IBM
hardened to 'any code as long as it is ours'."
Sometime in 1964 [Bemer doesn't say, and I've forgotten -- CP],
the IBM System/360 was announced.
On 1965 June 10, IBM voted "yes" on the proposed revised ASCII;
the total X3.2 vote was 31-0-0.
On 1967 Dec. 22, ISO 646 [the international character code
for which ASCII is the US variation -- CP] was approved as a standard.
The above indicates that IBM's involvement with the ASCII code
has actually been "subject to change without notice".
-- Clay Phipps
--
{cbosgd decvax!decwrl!amd70 harpo hplabs!hpda ihnp4 sri-unix ucbvax!amd70}
!fortune!phipps