RE: Hexadecimal digits

From: Doug Ewell (
Date: Tue Jun 08 2010 - 12:28:20 CDT

  • Next message: Laurentiu Iancu: "RE: Questionable lines on LineBreakTest.txt"

    "Luke-Jr" <luke at dashjr dot org> wrote:

    >> Yes, when discussing values in hex, this is an English problem. What do I
    >> call the useful higher powers and groups? What is the equivalent of
    >> "thousands" or "millions" to refer to powers of 65536 or 4294967296?
    > Seriously, these questions are all answered in the book...
    > (written using "classical" hexadecimal digits)
    > 0=Noll 1=An 2=De 3=Te 4=Go 5=Su 6=By
    > 7=Ra 8=Me 9=Ni A=Ko b=Hu C=Vy d=La
    > E=Po F=Fy 10=Ton 100=San 1000=Mill 1,0000=Bong
    > 1,0000,0000=Tam 1,0000,0000,0000=Song 1,0000,0000,0000,0000=Tran
    > 2,8d5b,7E0F=Detam, memill - lasan - suton - hubong, ramill-posanfy

    I agree with Mark Shoulson that this entire line of argument--whether
    hex is better or more "natural" than decimal, how to speak the names of
    hexadecimal numbers, and such--is outside the scope of this list. The
    purpose of Unicode is to encode characters that have achieved some
    agreed-upon level of actual use in the real world. It is not a venue
    for promoting any sort of reform.

    Many people on this list may be personally interested in this
    discussion--we do have other interests besides Unicode, after all--but
    in that case I suggest prepending "[OT]" to the Subject line to
    acknowledge that the thread is Off-Topic with respect to Unicode.

    Doug Ewell | Thornton, Colorado, USA |
    RFC 5645, 4645, UTN #14 | ietf-languages @ is dot gd slash 2kf0s ­

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Jun 08 2010 - 12:31:25 CDT