Re: dozenal and hexadecimal digits

From: D.V. Henkel-Wallace (gumby@henkel-wallace.org)
Date: Tue May 16 2000 - 14:23:47 EDT

Next message: John Cowan: "Re: LATIN U/V"
Previous message: Kenneth Whistler: "Re: COPYLEFT SIGN"
Maybe in reply to: Robert Lozyniak: "dozenal and hexadecimal digits"
Next in thread: Timothy Partridge: "Re: dozenal and hexadecimal digits"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

At 02:26 16-05-00 -0800, Antoine Leca wrote:

>I remember reading (G. Ifrah's ?) two possible explanations

By the way Ifrah's marvellous book has been translated into English. I
haven't looked to see the quality of the translation; the English edition
is one unwieldy volume.

ISBN is 0471375683; please buy it from your local independent bookseller.

Next message: John Cowan: "Re: LATIN U/V"
Previous message: Kenneth Whistler: "Re: COPYLEFT SIGN"
Maybe in reply to: Robert Lozyniak: "dozenal and hexadecimal digits"
Next in thread: Timothy Partridge: "Re: dozenal and hexadecimal digits"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:21:02 EDT