Re: Phoenician numbers

From: Michael Everson (everson@evertype.com)
Date: Sat May 22 2004 - 15:01:42 CDT

Next message: Christopher Fynn: "Re: [META] Should there be a separate public list for CLDR?"

Previous message: Michael Everson: "Re: [META] Should there be a separate public list for CLDR?"
Maybe in reply to: Michael Everson: "Phoenician numbers"
Next in thread: Michael Everson: "Re: Response to Everson Phoenician and why June 7?"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

At 19:38 +0000 2004-05-22, James Kass wrote:
>Michael Everson wrote,
>
>> Anyone have any comments about the numbers proposed for the
>> Phoenician encoding?
>
>The proposed PHOENICIAN NUMERAL TWENTY is actually a ligature of
>two PHOENICIAN NUMERAL TENs and should be encoded as:
>
>TEN plus ZWJ plus TEN

It may derive from such a ligature, but I don't think it is one.
Indeed our digits 2 and 3 are original ligatures of strokes.

-- 
Michael Everson * * Everson Typography *  * http://www.evertype.com

Next message: Christopher Fynn: "Re: [META] Should there be a separate public list for CLDR?"
Previous message: Michael Everson: "Re: [META] Should there be a separate public list for CLDR?"
Maybe in reply to: Michael Everson: "Phoenician numbers"
Next in thread: Michael Everson: "Re: Response to Everson Phoenician and why June 7?"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat May 22 2004 - 15:02:27 CDT