The question is, whether the two versions (horizontal and vertical) are warranted for or not. With my limited knowledge of the matter, I would believe only one set to be encodable, the other being free / stylistic variation.
Sz Szelp, André Szabolcs +43 (650) 79 22 400 On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 9:19 PM, Jameson Quinn <[email protected]>wrote: > Last year, I started a discussion about proposing the Mayan numerals for > inclusion in Unicode. Several people on the list supported this idea, and > encouraged me to submit a proposal. I did not manage to do so last year, > but I am ready to now. > > I have access to dozens of different books with their page numbers, tables > of contents, and publication dates in mayan numerals. Several of them use > the numerals in other ways, such as numbered lists or century numbers (ie, > "siglo 16", 16th century, with 16 in Mayan numbers). All of these are from > a single publishing house, and I know of 2 other publishers who use similar > practices. None of the samples I have are textbooks, and it is common for > math textbooks here in Guatemala to have a section on Mayan numerals, > typically with a few simple addition problems or the like. > > The publisher of the books I have is interested, and would probably sign > on to my proposal, though it would take about a month for them to get full > consensus on this. > > I can also provide photos of Guatemalan currency notes, which have mayan > as well as arabic numerals on them. > > I'd like to propose 40 glyphs: the vertical and horizontal versions of the > digits 0-19. The zero glyph would be in it's "shell" form; the several > minor variants of this form would be considered as the same base glyph. > This initial proposal would not include head variants or the petroglyphic > "flower" zero, nor would it include petroglyphic marginal decorations on > the glyphs for 1, 6, 11, and 16, as all of those are generally used in a > context of fully glyphic writing, which has a number of difficult technical > issues to resolve before it's ready for unicode. (Although I could provide > at least one modern example of a glyphic text; this is at least to some > degree a living art today, though it was dead for centuries.) > > I'd like to know what should be my next step, and if anyone who's more > experienced with unicode procedures would like to advise me more closely. > > Sincerely, > Jameson Quinn >
