You have it precisely backwards. There is only one rule. Eight bits make an ASCII character.
The rule I gave does create the works of Shakespeare inter alia.
You have it precisely backwards. There is only one rule. Eight bits make an ASCII character.
You have a few things wrong here. First you do not need eight bits. In fact the definition of ASCII is only for 7 bits, but that is minutae. The problem you have though is that Shakespeare's works were not written in binary, so to get them into binary you would need to translate them. Now what would it take to translate them from paper to binary?
Why you would need an intelligent agent, thats what you would need. You would need a human, God or a machine that could do the translating (however the machine would have had to have itself been built by an intelligent agent so you cannot get away from it).
There is nothing in the alphabet that tells us how to turn it into binary. Binary is a symbolic way of representing things (yes - a picture - while it can be put in a computer as zeros and ones is not made up of zeros and ones so it must be translated, same for letters or anything else you would put in a computer). To achieve this translation you would need either an intelligent agent or a machine made by an intelligent agent. Symbols are untranslatable except by the actions of intelligent agents. That is why the ASCII code came to be developed as an agreement between intelligent agents (humans) tha 00000001 would mean one thing, 00000000 another, 00000011 still another etc. To accomplish this they set up a set of rules which say:
Let A = 00101011
Let B = 00101100
etc.
So just for the ASCII code you need some 128 rules + one more to tell the computer to read them eight at a time.
However, to translate Shakespeare to binary, you need much more, as I already mentioned - you need intellgent agents because symbols are the product of nothing except intelligent agents and only intelligent agents can translate symbols.