Hi I tend to agree with the arguments of Doug and Hans. From: Doug Ewell ([email protected]) Date: Fri Jun 04 2010 - 14:35:15 CDT
> "Luke-Jr" <luke at dashjr dot org> wrote: >> Unicode has Roman numerals and bar counting (base 0); why should base 16 be >> denied unique characters? > The Roman numeral characters starting at U+2160 are compatibility > characters. They exist in Unicode only because they existed in one or > more of the other character sets used as a source for Unicode, so data > can be converted between Unicode and the other set without loss. > People aren't encouraged to use the special Roman numeral characters, > but rather to write Roman numerals using Basic Latin letters. And yes, > that means the string "mix" out of context could be an ordinary English > word or the Roman representation of decimal 1,009. Plain text is full > of things that get resolved by rudimentary context. Hexadecimal numbers > are like that. Yes, thanks, my feelings. > A set of hex-digit glyphs like Nystrom's, or like Bruce Martin's (see > Wikipedia "Hexadecimal"), or any other characters for that matter, would > have to see much more popularity than this to be considered for formal > encoding. If you are interested in a writing system that includes > built-in support for hex digits, see > http://www.evertype.com/standards/csur/ewellic.html . But do not expect > any part of this writing system, which has been used by maybe four or > five people, to be a candidate for Unicode either. > -- > Doug Ewell | Thornton, Colorado, USA | http://www.ewellic.org From: Hans Aberg ([email protected]) Date: Fri Jun 04 2010 - 16:45:57 CDT > On 4 Jun 2010, at 20:39, Luke-Jr wrote: >> Unicode has Roman numerals and bar counting (base 0); why should >> base 16 be >> denied unique characters? > Anyway, if you can show these John Nystrom Tonal System glyphs have > been in textual use, perhaps they should be encoded. Thanks. That's if they have been in textual use -- and sorry; I think it's necessary to use the characters you have developed in a small circle first somehow, then to propose their encoding in the unicode character sets. Best wishes in any case, C. E. Whitehead [email protected]
