From: Luke-Jr (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Tue Mar 08 2011 - 16:09:07 CST
On Tuesday, March 08, 2011 2:32:14 pm Ken Whistler wrote:
> On 3/7/2011 9:28 PM, Tiago Estill de Noronha wrote:
> > How about assigning a whole plane (one of the currently unassigned
> > ones) for digit characters, starting from the digit for zero at the
> > beggining and going up in sequence; without defining the actual
> > appearance of the digits (different fonts would draw them their own
> > way). This wouldn't deal with ambiguity between different bases, but
> > would allow standardsation of digits for writing numbers in lots of
> > bases, all the way up to somewhere around base 65535
> Not gonna happen.
> > What do you think?
> Not a good idea. What problem is it trying to solve?
> There are perfectly valid, widespread and agreed upon notations for
> decimal, binary, hexadecimal, and octal numbers, using existing
> characters. There are a few advocates for duodecimal systems who want
> special symbols for 10 and 11,
> or who want some other special encoding.
Hey, don't forget tonal!
That said, I also think this is a bad idea-- fonts shouldn't choose characters
like that. It'd be like using the same entries for the Latin and Cyrillic
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Mar 08 2011 - 16:12:58 CST