RFC 135 (rfc135) - Page 1 of 3
Response to NWG/RFC 110
Alternative Format: Original Text Document
Network Working Group W. Hathaway
Request for Comments: 135 AMES
NIC: 6712 29 April 1971
Updates: 110
Response to NWG/RFC #110
(Conventions for Using an IBM 2741 Terminal as a User Console for
Access to Network Server Hosts)
I would like to propose the following conventions to replace the ones
proposed in RFC #110. The original conventions suffer from lack of
consideration of the correspondence 2741 and what I feel are
inconsistencies and considerable difficulty of use. (The 2741
terminal with correspondence keyboard does not have all of the
standard characters, notably:
less than
logical not [1]
vertical bar |
Thus we must not use any of these characters in our conventions if we
wish to support the correspondence 2741.)
The dedication of certain characters to special functions involves a
trade-off: the convenience of having the function as a single key
versus the inconvenience of having to use two keys to enter the
character as data. I believe that only two of the special functions
listed in RFC #110 justify the dedication of a key: the "character
escape" function and the "character delete" function. For the
"character escape" function I recommend the cent sign [2], as this
character is on both the regular and correspondence 2741 terminals
and is not in the ASCII character set. For the "character delete"
function I recommend the backspace key for obvious reasons. While
there is some need to be able to enter the character "backspace" (as
for underscoring output etc.,) I feel that the trade-off mentioned
above clearly indicates a single key "character delete" would be much
more valuable than a single key "backspace" and a two key "character
delete."
For the other special functions I recommend two key combinations,
consisting of "character escape" [2] and a key to define the
function. These are summarized below:
Hathaway