Re: numeric properties of Nl characters in the UCD

From: Michael Everson (
Date: Wed Nov 26 2003 - 08:18:06 EST

  • Next message: Philippe Verdy: "RE: Compression through normalization"

    At 04:40 -0800 2003-11-26, Andrew C. West wrote:

    >But why do U+10341 [GOTHIC LETTER NINETY] and U+1034A [GOTHIC LETTER NINE
    >HUNDRED], which are letters that are only ever used to represent the
    >numbers 90 and 900 respectively (they have no intrinsic phonetic
    >value), not have a numeric value assigned to them?

    Because there's no particular value in doing so.

    The burden is on you (or whomever) to prove that there would be.
    Otherwise, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

    >Is this perhaps because all the other Gothic letters can also be
    >used to represent numbers in exactly the same way that U+10341 and
    >U+1034A are used (these two letter were devised specifically to fill
    >the gap in the series of numbers represented by the ordinary Gothic
    >letters), and in this respect the two Gothic letters Ninety and Nine
    >Hundred are no different from the
    >other Gothic letters which can be used to represent numbers but that
    >do not have a numeric value assigned to them by Unicode ?

    Yes, that's right.

    >BTW I've just noticed that U+10341 has a general category of "Lo" (Letter,
    >Other), whereas U+1034A has a general category of "Nl" (Number, Letter), which
    >seems a little odd.

    It does.

    Michael Everson * * Everson Typography *  *

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Nov 26 2003 - 09:30:48 EST