Comment on Universally Unique Lexicographically Sortable IdentifierComments−some_furry6yUses Crockford's base32 for better efficiency and readability (5 bits per character)From what I can tell, this is the alphabet: 0123456789ABCDEFGHJKMNPQRSTVWXYZ Is there any reason why Crockford's alphabet hasn't been rolled into an RFC that supersedes RFC 4648 if it's more efficient and readable?RFC 4648 specifies [0-9a-v] (base32hex) and [a-z2-7] (base32).
Comments
From what I can tell, this is the alphabet:
Is there any reason why Crockford's alphabet hasn't been rolled into an RFC that supersedes RFC 4648 if it's more efficient and readable?RFC 4648 specifies [0-9a-v] (base32hex) and [a-z2-7] (base32).