- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 02:14:40 +0000 (GMT)
- To: Christos Cheretakis <xalkina@otenet.gr>
- Cc: Web Style Sheets W3C Mailing List <www-style@w3.org>
On Tue, 17 Dec 2002, Christos Cheretakis wrote: > > > > This is the only system that is not defined for such an odd range of > > numbers. Are you really sure that modern greek numbers are only defined in > > the range: > > > > 1..89, 100..189, 200..289, 300..389, 400..489, 500..589, 600..689, > > 700..789, 800..889, 1000..1089, 1100..1189, 1200..1289, 1300..1389, > > 1400..1489, 1500..1589, 1600..1689, 1700..1789, 1800..1889, [...] > > 889700..889789, 889800..889889. > > > > ...? > > > > That seems incredibly inconvenient. > > > > Well, we don't really use it for long lists!!! Decimal would be > preferrable for those cases! Given the mess here, would you be particularly opposed to making the *-modern-greek numbering styles be only defined in the range 1..89? That would remove the space problem rather neatly too. >> How about ancient-greek, lower-greek, upper-greek, lower-greek-alpha, >> upper-greek-alpha? > > I'd really have no objection for the modern styles to be called > either lower-modern-greek/upper-modern-greek or lower-greek/upper-greek. > I guess the first one is more precise, while the second one's a bit > shorter and more convenient. I'd surely hate to see the existing > implementations be called simply lower-greek. But I'm sure you already > know that ;-) lower-greek-alpha & upper-greek-alpha sounds better for them. Ok, I think I'll go with ancient-greek, lower-greek, upper-greek, lower-greek-alpha, upper-greek-alpha. If, once the spec reaches the end of the CR period, we find that implementations have used lower-greek instead of lower-alpha-greek, maybe we'll have to change the names to match. >> Is "numeral-sign" a (sometimes absent) suffix, or is it part of the >> number? If it is part of the number, what would be the typical suffix? (In >> decimal, the suffix is '.' because lists go '1.', '2.', '3.', ...) > > In the ancient greek style it is part of the number. In the modern > styles, when used in a list's context like "alpha.", "beta.", etc., it > would be dropped. Preferred suffix is ")", but ")." and "." are used as > well. Ok, so for modern I won't mention numeral-sign, and I'll make the suffix ")". > > Cool, thanks. (FWIW, all i need are the codepoints. The rest means very > > little to me. :-) I use the codepoints to include examples in the spec.) > > It helps me in copy-pasting the codepoints next to their names. And > for one, I'm only sure about the iso7 column!!! Since my mail client (due to various reasons) treats everything as ISO-8859-1... :-) >>> the number of the beast would be: >>> ancient-greek: U+03C8 U+03BE U+03DB U+0374 >> >> 766? :-) > > Did I make a mistake, or is there another beast I'm not aware of? Mistake, according to the tables. > I remember Mr. Karasavidis referring to a page of the greek Ministry > of Culture for their service offices, but I cannot get to that URL > right now. That would be very useful. > I've also found a list of the tax service offices at > http://www.e-oikonomia.gr/ipiresies/doy/kodikoi_doy.htm . Some of them > are numbered after the algorithmic style, but the biggest number I've > seen is 23 (kappa-gamma). That page is unavailable for me. :-( -- Ian Hickson )\._.,--....,'``. fL "meow" /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. http://index.hixie.ch/ `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Monday, 16 December 2002 21:14:42 UTC