From: Mark Davis ☕ (email@example.com)
Date: Sat Jul 24 2010 - 20:47:52 CDT
Michael, what you are also probably not realizing is that the request is not
for *all* numbers, but for decimal numbers (general_category=decimal_number)
From just a quick scan, it appears that they are currently all contiguous
within their respective groups. If we were to impose a stability policy, it
would be a constraint on the general_category: we would not
assign general_category=decimal_number to any character unless it was part
of a contiguous range of 10 such characters with ascending values from 0..9.
That would, of course, have some bearing on encoding,
since general_category=decimal_number is important for interpreting values,
if the characters are indeed part of a decimal system.
As for Asmus's concern, it is real; it is when we know that characters are
numeric, but don't realize that they could be used as part of a decimal
system. In practice we might be able to accomodate it by anticipating the
issue: putting characters with values 0-9 in a contiguous range, leaving
holes if there is a missing one (typically zero).
*— Il meglio è l’inimico del bene —*
On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 18:09, Michael Everson <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On 25 Jul 2010, at 02:02, Bill Poser wrote:
> > As I said, it isn't a huge issue, but scattering the digits makes the
> programming a bit more complex and error-prone and the programs a little
> less efficient.
> But it would still *work*. So my hyperbole was not outrageous. And nobody
> has actually scattered them. THough there are various types of "runs" in
> existing encoded digits and numbers.
> Believe it or don't. But I suspect I've been responsible for more of the
> encoded numbers than any other person is.
> Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Jul 24 2010 - 20:50:48 CDT