From: Andrew Cunningham <lang.support_at_gmail.com>

Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2016 19:55:58 +1000

Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2016 19:55:58 +1000

The original proposals inluded a specific numbr 10 codepoint. I assume it

was removed and its representation was to be generated by use of the

combining characters

In the original proposal there was nothing corresponding to ONE+TENS

instead there was a distinct number TEN. The glyph for number 10 was

identical to glyph for syllable PU.

A.

On Friday, 10 June 2016, Philippe Verdy <verdy_p_at_wanadoo.fr> wrote:

*> I do not contest that about number 11, and it was not the question !
*

*> The question was about number **10**:
*

*> * ONE+TENS or ONE+TEENS ?
*

*> This is NOT specified clearly in TUS Chapter 19 which speaks about
*

numbers 1-9 then 11-19 for TEENS, and TENS for numbers 20-99.

*> The question is the same about 110,210,...,910:
*

*> * (ONE..NINE)+HUNDREDS+ONE+TENS or (ONE..NINE)+HUNDREDS+ONE+TEENS ?
*

*> For me it seems that both questions will repy with ONE+TENS, not
*

ONE+TEENS.

*>
*

*> 2016-06-10 9:00 GMT+02:00 Andrew Cunningham <lang.support_at_gmail.com>:
*

*>>
*

*>> Hi Phillipe,
*

*>>
*

*>> ONE+TEENS (1E8C7,1E8D0) is definitely the number 11
*

*>>
*

*>> A.
*

*>>
*

*>> On 10 Jun 2016 4:53 pm, "Philippe Verdy" <verdy_p_at_wanadoo.fr> wrote:
*

*>>>
*

*>>> Given that there's no digit for zero, you need to append combining
*

characters to digits 1-9 in order to multiply them by a base

10/100/1,000/10,000/100,000/1,000,000. The system is then additive. I don't

know how zero is represented. Note that for base 10, when the first digit

is 1 (i.e. for numbers 11-19), the combining character is not 1E8D1 (TENS)

but 1E8D0 (TEENS), i.e. the slash-like glyph. But the description says that

TEENS is only for numbers 11-19, not for number 10.

*>>> But I agree that there should be a reference in
*

http://www.unicode.org/charts/PDF/U1E800.pdf, to the description in

http://www.unicode.org/versions/Unicode8.0.0/ch19.pdf (section 19.8, pages

722-723) that would explain how to render 10 (add some rows in table 19-6

for the numbers 10/100/.../1,000,000).

*>>> This leaves a hole in the description. I'm not sure that the glyph for
*

PU is exactly the glyph for 10. Or what is the appropriate sequence:

ONE+TENS (1E8C7,1E8D1) or ONE+TEENS (1E8C7,1E8D0) ? The description is

ambiguous, and probably both sequences should produce the equivalent glyph.

However the letter PU (when meaning number 10) looks more like the glyph

produced by ONE+TEN (1E8C7,1E8D1).

*>>> Then how to represent zero ? Probably by a syllable or word meaning
*

"none" (don't know which it is), or by using European or Arabic digits (as

indicated in Chapter 19).

*>>>
*

*>>>
*

*>>> 2016-06-10 8:15 GMT+02:00 Andrew Cunningham <lang.support_at_gmail.com>:
*

*>>>>
*

*>>>> Ok looking at issue again I guess the other alternative is to have a
*

discontiguous set of numbers. Represent 10 as U+1E8C7 U+1E8D1 and map it

within the font to the PU glyph.

*>>>>
*

*>>>> And hope that font developers don't create a glyph based on shape of
*

U+1E8C7 and U+1E8D1, but PU instead.

*>>>>
*

*>>>> Andrew
*

*>>>>
*

*>>>> On Friday, 10 June 2016, Andrew Cunningham <lang.support_at_gmail.com>
*

wrote:

*>>>> > Hi,
*

*>>>> > Currently I am doing some work on the Mende Kikakui script, and I
*

was wondering what the best way was to represent the number 10.

*>>>> > In the early proposals for the script there was a glyph and
*

codepoint specifically for the number 10. When the model for Mende Kikakui

numbers was changed before the finalising of the code block, the number ten

was removed. But using existing digits and numbers we can produce 1-9 and

11 -> but we can not produce the number 10 from digits and numbers.

*>>>> > The number ten uses the same glyph as syllable PU U+1E88E.
*

*>>>> > Should I use U+1E88E to represent both the number 10 and the
*

syllable PU?

*>>>> > Andrew
*

*>>>> >
*

*>>>> > --
*

*>>>> > Andrew Cunningham
*

*>>>> > lang.support_at_gmail.com
*

*>>>> >
*

*>>>> >
*

*>>>> >
*

*>>>>
*

*>>>> --
*

*>>>> Andrew Cunningham
*

*>>>> lang.support_at_gmail.com
*

*>>>>
*

*>>>>
*

*>>>>
*

*>>>
*

*>
*

*>
*

-- Andrew Cunningham lang.support_at_gmail.comReceived on Fri Jun 10 2016 - 04:56:19 CDT

*
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0
: Fri Jun 10 2016 - 04:56:19 CDT
*