Re: Cohen's paper on byte order

From: Roger Schlafly (rogersc@mindspring.com)
Date: 04/08/03


From: "Roger Schlafly" <rogersc@mindspring.com>
Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2003 17:20:35 GMT


"Brian Gladman" <brg@gladman.plus.com> wrote
> Now a question for everyone with an interest: does the following, added at
> the end of section 3.1, encapsulate what is needed?
> "Where these sequences are represented externally as enumerated arrays of
> 8-bit unsigned integers (commonly referred to as octets, bytes or unsigned
> characters), the integer with an array index n will be formed from bits
8*n
> to 8*n+7 of the sequence in such a way that higher bit indexes are
> associated with lower numeric significance."

I think it belongs in sec. 3.2, because that is where a "byte" is
defined. Sec. 3.2 says:

   It is also convenient to denote byte values using hexadecimal notation
with each of two groups of four bits being denoted by a single character as
in Fig. 1.

I would replace that with

   It is also convenient to identify byte values with integers from 0 to
255,
and use hexadecimal notation for those integers.