Re: Mende Kikakui Number 10

On Sat, 11 Jun 2016 12:25:39 +0200, Philippe Verdy wrote:
>
> Exactly, Unicode should not create its own logic about scripts or numeral systems.
>
> All looks like the encoding of 10 as a pair (ONE+combining TENS) was a severe
> conceptual error that could have been avoided by NOT encoding "TENS" as combining
> but as a regular number/digit TEN usable isolately, and forming a contectual
> ligature with a previous digit from TWO to NINE.
>
> The encoding of 10 as (ONE+TENS) is superfluously needing an artificial leading
> ONE. This is purely an Unicode construction, foreign to the logic of the numeral
> system.
>

Seeing the discussion exhausted, I join my hope to Philippe Verdyʼs,
and reinforce by quoting Asmus Freytag on backcompat vs enhancement,
before bringing another concern:

«If you add a feature to match behavior somewhere else,
it rarely pays to make that perform "better", because
it just means it's now different and no longer matches.
The exception is a feature for which you can establish
unambiguously that there is a metric of correctness or
a widely (universally?) shared expectation by users
as to the ideal behavior. In that case, being compatible
with a broken feature (or a random implementation of one)
may in fact be counter productive.»

http://www.unicode.org/mail-arch/unicode-ml/y2016-m03/0109.html

Being bound with stability guarantees, Unicode could eventually add a _new_

*1E8D7 MENDE KIKAKUI NUMBER TEN

Best wishes,

Marcel
Received on Sat Jun 11 2016 - 17:13:32 CDT