<div dir="ltr">Trying to reboot this conversation, what *demand* is there for supporting non-latin digits?<div><br></div><div>AFAICT [1], most literate adults use latin digits (0-9) for basic math in North America, South America, Europe, Australia, and countries using a CJK script. Online stores and license plates for the UAE and India lists prices using latin digits. By process of elimination [2], language groups that don't use latin numerals drops to <100 million.</div><div><br></div><div>If those numbers are accurate, then there isn't enough of a critical mass to justify the implementation effort. Not if you aren't also going to translate keywords....</div><div><br></div><div><div><div><div dir="ltr" data-smartmail="gmail_signature">Thank you,<div>-Zach Lym</div><div><br></div><div></div></div></div>[1]: <a href="https://linguistics.stackexchange.com/questions/37899/how-prevalent-are-western-hindu-arabic-numerals-digits-0-9-in-cultures-with-si?noredirect=1#comment87069_37899" target="_blank">https://linguistics.stackexchange.com/questions/37899/how-prevalent-are-western-hindu-arabic-numerals-digits-0-9-in-cultures-with-si?noredirect=1#comment87069_37899</a></div></div><div><div><div dir="ltr"><div>[2]: <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_writing_systems#List_of_writing_scripts_by_adoption" target="_blank">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_writing_systems#List_of_writing_scripts_by_adoption</a></div></div></div></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, Dec 23, 2020 at 7:30 AM Steven R. Loomis <<a href="mailto:srl295@gmail.com" target="_blank">srl295@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto">For much more on localized numbers, see CLDR, <div><a href="https://www.unicode.org/reports/tr35/tr35-numbers.html#Contents" target="_blank">https://www.unicode.org/reports/tr35/tr35-numbers.html#Contents</a></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">-s</div></div><div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 1:57 PM Zach Lym via Unicode <<a href="mailto:unicode@unicode.org" target="_blank">unicode@unicode.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr">I don't think it's fair to dismiss this as "not a unicode problem." As the OP pointed out, support for non-latin variable names is largely due to Unicode's identity standard and extensive implementation advice.<div><br></div><div>The section on numbering (5.5) is only a page long and essentially recommends handling decimal based numbering systems. There isn't nearly as much care given to this topic. There is a standard annex on mathematics, but that is in PDF form and is largely concerned with parsing and display of mathematical formulas.</div><div><br></div><div> However, as is the answer to most questions, it is a matter of time and money. If someone is willing to spend the time expanding 5.5 writing a new annex, I am sure the Unicode committee would be happy to review it. Would you be interested in doing that legwork?</div><div><br></div><div>I'm actually pretty new here, what's the best way Roger could contribute to make Unicode better in this regard?</div></div><div><br></div>Thanks,<div>-Zach Lym</div></div><div dir="ltr"><div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 5:23 PM Mark E. Shoulson via Unicode <<a href="mailto:unicode@unicode.org" target="_blank">unicode@unicode.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div style="direction:ltr">
<div>On 12/16/20 10:40 AM, Doug Ewell via
Unicode wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>What I don't understand here is why this is being framed implicitly as a Unicode problem, or an XML problem, or a general law of nature ("why can’t a Bengali-speaking person use the Bengali digits"), instead of an inherent limitation of that particular library function used for that particular language.</pre>
</blockquote>
<p>Yes, exactly. This is "a characteristic of the code libraries,
not a Unicode problem."</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>There are probably reasonable reasons not to update the actual
atol/strtol calls, but one could certainly write a library to do
what you're talking about... and apparently someone has, by Bill
Poser's report of his libuninum. There ya go.<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>~mark<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
</div>
</blockquote></div></div></div>
</blockquote></div></div>
</blockquote></div>