On Friday 04 June 2010 06:32:06 am you wrote: > Simply use the digits “0” through “9”, and the > letters “A” through “F”; cf. > <http://www.unicode.org/faq/casemap_charprop.html#13>.
This makes it more complex to differentiate between numbers and letters/units/etc. > I do not know, how successful Nystrom’s proposal has been, > and I cannot assess whether his digits deserve to be > encoded, in Unicode. If you think, these digits need > to be encoded, you are free to propose that; for the > procedure required, > cf. <http://www.unicode.org/faq/char_proposal.html>. As far as I know, I am currently the only human alive with the intention of adopting the Tonal system. I also plan to teach it as the primary numerical system in my home-school curriculum (mainly for my own children, of which I thus far have four), and vaguely promote it when I have time. While I might be able to use the private areas for home, not having standard characters will likely interfere with any widescale adoption or mainlining patches (for example, adding Tonal units to common UNIX tools such as 'ls'). In this way, I see the question of whether they "deserve" to be encoded as a chicken-and-egg problem: they will never "deserve" encoding as long as they cannot be encoded.
