W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > April 2011

Re: [css3-lists] CJK numbering algorithms

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 16:13:13 -0700
Message-ID: <4DAF6889.8000705@inkedblade.net>
To: www-style@w3.org
On 04/20/2011 03:17 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 3:00 PM, fantasai<fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>  wrote:
>> Aside from the characters used and the filter in rule 7, are
>> there other differences among the CJK styles?
>
> Yes.
>
> * For Chinese, interior zeros in a group, like "101" or "2002" aren't
> dropped, though the second case collapses to have only a single zero
> in the middle.  Japanese and Korean drop all zeros in the informal
> style, but drops none in the formal (I haven't yet editted the algos
> to make the formal/informal distinction).

What does it mean to not drop a zero? "一百一" looks correct to me.

> I do agree that the algos need some refactoring, though, particularly
> Chinese, which was written by adding to the old algorithm rather than
> starting fresh.  Some things, like not dropping 0 groups until the
> end, are meant to make the descriptions more clear when you're talking
> about the "3rd group" and such - is it the *original* 3rd group, or
> what was previously the 4th group before you removed the original 3rd
> group because it was 0?

Label the groups. In English you'd say "do this to the thousands group".
So say "do this to the ten-thousands group".

~fantasai
Received on Wednesday, 20 April 2011 23:13:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:39 GMT