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

Re: [css3-lists] CJK numbering algorithms

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 18:21:26 -0700
Message-ID: <BANLkTik3JzzasEXZFmjqX01jpUQvGZo6Vg@mail.gmail.com>
To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Cc: www-style@w3.org, Ambrose Li <ambrose.li@gmail.com>
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 6:08 PM, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote:
> On 04/20/2011 04:29 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 4:13 PM, fantasai<fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
>>  wrote:
>>>
>>> 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.
>>
>> Do you mean for Chinese, or Japanese/Korean formal?
>
> Chinese. "一百零一" seems excessively explicit for list numbering...
> Granted it's been awhile, and my Chinese is rusty. I could very well
> be mixing things up.

I was told that in informal styles the 0s were sometimes dropped, but
it was okay to retain them in the same way as you would in the formal
style.


>> According to the native Chinese-speaker on my team (I have a record of
>> the conversation, since it took place in text), the number 2002 0000
>> is 二千零二万, for example.
>
> Was that for spoken / prose styles or list numbering? (They might be
> different.)

Dunno.  The context of the discussion thread was clear, but it's
possible they still ended up speaking about numbering in some other
context.

~TJ
Received on Thursday, 21 April 2011 01:22:13 GMT

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