Re: Improper grounds for rejection of proposal N2677

From: Doug Ewell (
Date: Fri Oct 28 2005 - 07:17:27 CST

  • Next message: Murray Sargent: "RE: ANSI and Unicode for x00 - xFF"

    The Roman numerals were included in Unicode 1.0 because they were part
    of a legacy character set, probably Asian, with which Unicode had to
    maintain 1-to-1 convertibility. Nobody likes them much, and there is
    not a chance in the world that they would be in Unicode if not for the
    legacy convertibility requirement.

    Doug Ewell
    Fullerton, California
    ----- Original Message ----- 
    From: "Alexej Kryukov" <>
    To: <>
    Sent: Friday, October 28, 2005 5:25
    Subject: Re: Improper grounds for rejection of proposal N2677
    > I am wondering why in this long thread nobody has mentioned the Roman
    > digits in U+216*--217*. They look quite similar to
    > hexadecimal digits, because they also have case pars and also are
    > normally represented with Latin letters. Moreover, I would understand
    > if only I, V, X, L, C, D and M were separately encoded, but currently
    > all Roman numerals from I to XII (and only these ones), which can
    > be composed from the characters listed above, also have separate
    > codepoints.
    > So I am just wondering, why these characters were encoded? Should
    > they be actually used to represent Roman numerals, or it is OK to
    > replace them with the corresponding Latin Letters? And how should
    > numerals above XII to be composed?
    > To my mind, these characters look quite strange, but, if encoding
    > them is considered correct, then the hexadecimal digits should be
    > encoded for the very same reasons...

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Oct 28 2005 - 08:02:29 CST