Re: A sign/abbreviation for "magister"

Julian Bradfield wrote:
 
>> in the 17ᵗʰ or 18ᵗʰ century to keep it only for ordinals. Should
>> Unicode
>
> What do you mean, for ordinals? If you mean 1st, 2nd etc., then there
> is not now (when superscripting looks very old-fashioned) and never
> has been any requirement to superscript them, as far as I know -
> though since the OED doesn't have an entry for "1st", I can't easily
> check.
 
The English Wikipedia article "Ordinal number (linguistics)" does not
show numbers such as 1st, 2nd, etc. with superscripts, though as a
rich-text Web page, it could easily.
 
The article "English numerals" does include a bullet point: "The
suffixes -th, -st, -nd and -rd are occasionally written superscript
above the number itself." Note the word "occasionally."
 

--
Doug Ewell | Thornton, CO, US | ewellic.org