Mende Kikakui Number 10
frederic.grosshans at gmail.com
Fri Jun 10 11:43:21 CDT 2016
Le 10/06/2016 18:05, Philippe Verdy a écrit :
> OK, <ONE;combining TEENS> represents 11, but <ONE;combining TENS> is
> not clearly represents 10, and the proposals do not exhibit 10 with
> the same glyph as PU (even if it is based on it, in fact the combining
> TENS is a small subscript glyph variant of letter/syllable PU intended
> to mark digits).
> Using letter PU would discard the initial digit 1, and the subscript
> variant, making it confusable with a real letter/syllable PU.
> The initial proposal for letter 10 was a PU with a dot, i.e. instead
> of small-subscripting the PU glyph for TENS, the PU glyph is still
> used, but it is the initial digit one (normally a vertical stroke)
> which is subperscripted as a smaller tick (an in my opinion this tick
> should join with the letter PU, just like the other digits+TENS are
> displayed by attaching the TENS subscript to the standard digit.
Reading the proposal again, there is a mention that the glyph for 10
(puu) may be related to the one for PU (see page 3). They look really
similar, have both the same dot above, but the difference is the extent
of the vertical line on the right side. The normal way to write 10 does
NOT include a digit 1. (see discussion at the end of p4, where it is
explicitly stated), hence the confusion about the proper encoding of
> But encoding a standalone digit 10 would have been better
It has certainly been considered, and one can guess from the ad-hoc
document that many solutions have been evaluated and defended during
this meeting, and the final decision was a practical compromise. The
problem with the standalone number 10 is that the native user of the
script see it as the same symbol as the TENS number, with an inherent
dot which disapears when combined with something else.
> (and probably extending it to standalone versions for 11 and 12, for
> usage with months numbers and hours on clock, just like with Roman
No! Roman numerals where included for compatibility with East Asian
standards. They are compatibility characters.
> It would be interesting to look at how traditional solar clocks or
> traditional calendars, or even "modern" mechanical clocks with
> displays in Kikakui Mende, are showing these common numbers 10,11,12
> (may be there are photos or facsimiles of artworks or "real life"
> photos kept in some museum or in book library or videos showing some
> religious celebrations or social events where these digits would have
> been displayed or taught).
It may be interesting, but no standardisation happen because we
speculate that “may be there are photos” showing these characters, which
are presumably encodable as sequence !
More information about the Unicode