Re: Plain text custom fraction input

1. aren't the 'nut' style you said used in daily English too?
2.most of the time I seen fraction within Chinese text are in the 'nut'
style.
3. I think standards should noy be written in a way that users or
implementers cannot choose their preferred style to represent fractions?

2015年7月23日 上午6:58於 "Richard Wordingham" <richard.wordingham_at_ntlworld.com>寫道：
> > ...which brings us back to plain text fractions, which by an apparent
> > but tacit convention we can input as an *unlimited* string of
> > superscript digits, followed by U+2044, followed by an *unlimited*
> > string of subscript digits. What are you referring to when talking
> > about implementing the fraction slash?
>
> If you are happy with that style, I was wrong, I wasn't being clever
> enough. In a left to right context, the conversion of digits to the
> numerator and denominator forms can progress from right to left for the
> numerator by conditioning on the following character being a fraction
> slash or converted digit, and similarly from left to right for the
> denominator. I'm not sure what should happen in right to left
> contexts. I've a feeling the numerator should come before the
> denominator, but the bidi algorithm doesn't swap them - it keeps the
> first number on the left. Note that subscript and superscript digits
> are only available for those of us who use the Western Arabic digits.
>
> However, I believe there is a real problem for the 'nut' style, where
> the numerator and denominator are separated by a horizontal line - in
> Western Asia westwards. I'm having trouble finding examples of
> fractions using Indic scripts - apparently they originally stacked the
> numerator above the denominator, but I don't know what happens nowadays.
>
> <snip>
Received on Thu Jul 23 2015 - 00:57:10 CDT