Re: [css3-lists] Remaining feedback on the module

On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 2:26 PM, Matitiahu Allouche <matial@il.ibm.com> wrote:
> Tab Atkins wrote:
>
>> 5. I'm told there's a Hebrew alphabetic system: "This uses the Hebrew
>> letters without final
>> forms, i.e. U05D0-U05EA excluding U05DA, U05DD, U05DF, U05E3 and
>> U05E5".  I'd like some confirmation that this exists and is used,
>> along with some confirmation of the given definition.
>
> and also
>
>> 9. Apparently, at least some hebrew books number their pages with a
>> simpler additive system which just uses the the characters associated
>> with 1-9, 10-90, and 100-400, then just repeats TAV (the character for
>> 400) repeatedly for larger numbers (so 1100 would be תתש, rather than
>> א׳ק).  Can I switch to *just* this system (allowing me to eliminate
>> the special definition of Hebrew in favor of a simple @counter-style
>> rule), or is there still a good case for the current definition?
>
> If I understand what Tab Atkins means, in the first case (paragraph 5), the
> number 10 will be expressed with the tenth letter of the alphabet and the
> number 11 will be expressed with the eleventh letter of the alphabet
> (without the final forms). In the second case (paragraph 9), the number 10
> will be expressed with the tenth letter of the alphabet and the number 11
> will be expressed with the tenth letter followed by the first letter.
> Both systems are legitimate, but the second one is more natural in modern
> usage.
>
> I see no problem using repeated TAV for numbers higher than 799. This should
> be understood by whoever understands the notation up to 799. And frankly, I
> don't see that lists longer than a few dozens of items are critical.

Thanks, Mati.  In that case, I'll switch the 'hebrew' style over to
repeating TAV instead, and skip any alphabetic hebrew style for now.

~TJ

Received on Wednesday, 20 April 2011 22:03:31 UTC