From: Doug Ewell (email@example.com)
Date: Tue Jun 08 2010 - 12:28:20 CDT
"Luke-Jr" <luke at dashjr dot org> wrote:
>> Yes, when discussing values in hex, this is an English problem. What do I
>> call the useful higher powers and groups? What is the equivalent of
>> "thousands" or "millions" to refer to powers of 65536 or 4294967296?
> Seriously, these questions are all answered in the book...
> (written using "classical" hexadecimal digits)
> 0=Noll 1=An 2=De 3=Te 4=Go 5=Su 6=By
> 7=Ra 8=Me 9=Ni A=Ko b=Hu C=Vy d=La
> E=Po F=Fy 10=Ton 100=San 1000=Mill 1,0000=Bong
> 1,0000,0000=Tam 1,0000,0000,0000=Song 1,0000,0000,0000,0000=Tran
> 2,8d5b,7E0F=Detam, memill - lasan - suton - hubong, ramill-posanfy
I agree with Mark Shoulson that this entire line of argument--whether
hex is better or more "natural" than decimal, how to speak the names of
hexadecimal numbers, and such--is outside the scope of this list. The
purpose of Unicode is to encode characters that have achieved some
agreed-upon level of actual use in the real world. It is not a venue
for promoting any sort of reform.
Many people on this list may be personally interested in this
discussion--we do have other interests besides Unicode, after all--but
in that case I suggest prepending "[OT]" to the Subject line to
acknowledge that the thread is Off-Topic with respect to Unicode.
-- Doug Ewell | Thornton, Colorado, USA | http://www.ewellic.org RFC 5645, 4645, UTN #14 | ietf-languages @ is dot gd slash 2kf0s
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Jun 08 2010 - 12:31:25 CDT