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 20:42:19 -0700
Message-ID: <4DAFA79B.5000904@inkedblade.net>
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
CC: www-style@w3.org
On 04/20/2011 06:21 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 6:08 PM, fantasai wrote:
>> On 04/20/2011 04:29 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>>> On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 4:13 PM, fantasai wrote:
>>>> On 04/20/2011 03:17 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> * 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.

In that case, perhaps cjk-ideographic should drop the 零 so that there
is more consistency with Japanese. (IIRC the current proposal is to
map it to trad-chinese-informal.)

~fantasai
Received on Thursday, 21 April 2011 03:42:51 GMT

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