Bill Janssen wrote: > Well, I can certainly understand the bytes->base64->bytes side of > thing too. The "text" produced is specified as using "a 65-character > subset of US-ASCII", so that's really bytes. But it then goes on to say that these same characters are also a subset of EBCDIC. So it seems to be talking about characters as abstract entities here, not as bit patterns. Greg
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4