Michael, what you are also probably not realizing is that the request is not for *all* numbers, but for decimal numbers (general_category=decimal_number)
http://unicode.org/cldr/utility/list-unicodeset.jsp?a=[:general_category:decimal_number :] >From just a quick scan, it appears that they are currently all contiguous within their respective groups. If we were to impose a stability policy, it would be a constraint on the general_category: we would not assign general_category=decimal_number to any character unless it was part of a contiguous range of 10 such characters with ascending values from 0..9. That would, of course, have some bearing on encoding, since general_category=decimal_number is important for interpreting values, if the characters are indeed part of a decimal system. As for Asmus's concern, it is real; it is when we know that characters are numeric, but don't realize that they could be used as part of a decimal system. In practice we might be able to accomodate it by anticipating the issue: putting characters with values 0-9 in a contiguous range, leaving holes if there is a missing one (typically zero). Mark *— Il meglio è l’inimico del bene —* On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 18:09, Michael Everson <[email protected]> wrote: > On 25 Jul 2010, at 02:02, Bill Poser wrote: > > > As I said, it isn't a huge issue, but scattering the digits makes the > programming a bit more complex and error-prone and the programs a little > less efficient. > > But it would still *work*. So my hyperbole was not outrageous. And nobody > has actually scattered them. THough there are various types of "runs" in > existing encoded digits and numbers. > > Believe it or don't. But I suspect I've been responsible for more of the > encoded numbers than any other person is. > > Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/ > > > >
