Re: [css-counter-styles] japanese-informal counter style

Den 2013-11-02 00:37, skrev "Tab Atkins Jr." <>:

> On Sat, Aug 17, 2013 at 5:25 AM, Koji Ishii <> wrote:
>>>> Maybe there are just different styles taught across the country?
>>> "一千" is sometimes used, especially "一千万円" (ten million yen) is often used
>>> rather than
>>> "千万円", but this case is exceptional and not required for japanese-informal
>>> style.
>>> I tested Excel's [Format Cells - Number - 漢数字/Japanese] and got
>>> "一万千百十一" for 11111. (See the attached screen shot) I believe Excel's
>>> numbering is
>>> correct at least for Japanese styles.
>> "一千" is ambiguous for me, and can be counted as "different styles" as Tab
>> says. My preference varies by the numbers, and quick thinking is that, I
>> guess bad cases for not having it is worse than having it, such as:
>>   一万一千百十一 vs 一万千百十一: whichever is fine
>>   一千 vs 千: the latter is slightly better
>>   一千万 vs 千万: the former is much better
>>   一億一千百十一 vs 一億千百十一: the former is slightly better
>> Interestingly, Word and Excel disagrees on "千". I recently heard that ICU has
>> a function to format i18n numbers, does anybody know what ICU produces?

Open the Edit view, and you can change the values tested as well
as the rules. Please submit any proposed changes as CLDR tickets.

> Based on this, I'm leaving the rule as it stands, so that it produces
> a leading 一.  It seems that it's better to do so if we have to always
> choose one rule, even though in some circumstances it's fine or even
> preferred to drop it.

I would tend to agree that it is best in general (unless explicitly
dispreferred) to include the "one" multiplier explicitly, for all
"spellouts" in all locales; it is more formal and clearer. For "ja",
CLDR currently does that only for the "financial" variety.

    /Kent Karlsson

CLDR also covers "hanidec" numbering, which is using CJK characters for
0-9 (one select variety) in a decimal-positional style. This does not go
via RBNF, though.

> ~TJ

Received on Saturday, 2 November 2013 19:14:54 UTC