## Symbols for TEN and ELEVEN?

 Posts 359
Regular
växan
Regular
Joined: Feb 9 2006, 06:45 PM
i must apologize for the sudden evaporation of my image files
the url the files are uploaded to is temporarily down
however it should be back up quite soon

cheers

~ växan

DominusVobiscum
DominusVobiscum
You must create symbols as easily recognizable to people today as the Number Ten and the Number Eleven as possible, if you would ever want them to be accepted. Symbologically speaking, they must be easily recognizable, not difficult to write, and not easily mistaken for another symbol. Eleven would be rather easy; "11" is only two parallel strokes already. Merely modify it so that is seems more like one glyph rather than a "1" after a "1". You may strike through it somehow, but that would be somewhat odd as none of our current numerical glyphs have strikethroughs. Nor should it have too many angles, as this would make it more difficult to write and less pleasing to the eye (we already have enough trouble with "5"). I would connect the parallel strokes with a curve, similar to an upside-down "U". Ten is a bit more difficult. Either combine the "1" and the "0" in some way (perhaps by overlaying one on the other) or base the glyph off of "5", since it would be relatively easy to connect a "5"-like glyph to Ten for most people, I would think, as ten is twice five. An upside-down or backwards "5" would suffice and it would be no more difficult to write than the regular "5". And "5" looks more like "5" when backwards or upside-down than the "2" or "3" that you have been bandying about look like themselves when twisted around, because "5" is a more complex glyph.

-J.J.

Piotr
Piotr
Dan @ Sep 6 2006, 05:11 AM wrote:
neogenisis @ Sep 5 2006, 06:49 PM wrote:And before you say it looks like tone of the segments is defective, you can say the same thing about 6 and 8.
Yes, but this one is worse because could be confused with a broken 2 or a broken .
But also 8 can be confused with 9 or 0.

 Posts 38
Casual Member
The Tech Guy 'X7
Casual Member
Joined: Jul 12 2014, 09:50 PM
Piotr @ Aug 10 2015, 10:06 AM wrote:
Dan @ Sep 6 2006, 05:11 AM wrote:
neogenisis @ Sep 5 2006, 06:49 PM wrote:And before you say it looks like tone of the segments is defective, you can say the same thing about 6 and 8.
Yes, but this one is worse because could be confused with a broken 2 or a broken .
But also 8 can be confused with 9 or 0.
Was it really a good idea to resurrect this thread, almost 9 years after it was last posted on?

Anyway, I personally haven't really ever seen 0, 8 and 9 confused with each other, but I do see what is meant about the issues with , because when written in a hurry, it and "2" would look extremely similar.

I've almost never really been a fan of the use of for ten.
As of 1200:

Ïª means ten
Æ means eleven

I say Ïª as "ten" and Æ as "elv".

All numbers in my posts are dozenal unless stated otherwise. If a number is decimal, then I will put it inside the square brackets of "d[]". For example, d[32] means the decimal number thirty-two.

Sometimes, I will put a dozenal number in the square brackets of "u[]", "u" standing for "unnilimal" or "unqual" (two SDN terms that refer to "dozenal").

Obsessive poster
Obsessive poster
Joined: Sep 10 2011, 11:27 PM
The Tech Guy 'X7 @ Sep 29 2015, 11:41 PM wrote: Was it really a good idea to resurrect this thread, almost 9 years after it was last posted on?
Piotr is apparently a precocious pre-teen living somewhere in Poland, with issues. He's already been banned once for a year. He's been let back in, as long as he behaves himself. He's been warned that thread necromancy is a no-no unless he really has something useful to add to a long-dead discussion. Hopefully, it won't happen again.
As of 1202/03/01[z]=2018/03/01[d] I use:
ten,eleven = ↊↋, ᘔƐ, ӾƐ, XE or AB.
Base-neutral base annotations
Systematic Dozenal Nomenclature
Primel Metrology
Western encoding (not by choice)
Greasemonkey + Mathjax + PrimelDozenator
(Links to these and other useful topics are in my index post;
click on my user name and go to my "Website" link)

 Posts 113
Casual Member
Sennekuyl
Casual Member
Joined: Jun 29 2014, 06:00 AM
Piotr is quite young and English isn't his first language. So the intricacies of forums may elude him.

I agree with you on the "0 8 & 9". On the other hand 6 & 9 have survived their ambiguities for awhile. But maybe this would a good time to raise Lite's suggestions: á• for ten & á’§ for lev.

http://z13.invisionfree.com/DozensOnlin ... wtopic=996

(Can we find a substitute for nine at the same time? :sigh:)

 Posts 325
Regular
GamerGeek
Regular
Joined: Jan 9 2017, 09:32 PM
Endi @ Feb 21 2006, 11:59 AM wrote: ...at least nine by twelve pixels...
My pixel font is 3x5 with an additional HD 6x10

Piotr
Piotr
Sennekuyl @ Sep 30 2015, 01:46 AM wrote: Piotr is quite young and English isn't his first language. So the intricacies of forums may elude him.

I agree with you on the "0 8 & 9". On the other hand 6 & 9 have survived their ambiguities for awhile. But maybe this would a good time to raise Lite's suggestions: á• for ten & á’§ for lev.

http://z13.invisionfree.com/DozensOnlin ... wtopic=996

(Can we find a substitute for nine at the same time? :sigh:)
Calling me young, as well as calling English my not first language, they both offend me! That's annoying. I'm 12 now.

 Posts 325
Regular
GamerGeek
Regular
Joined: Jan 9 2017, 09:32 PM
Piotr @ Jan 25 2017, 05:52 PM wrote:
Sennekuyl @ Sep 30 2015, 01:46 AM wrote: Piotr is quite young and English isn't his first language. So the intricacies of forums may elude him.

I agree with you on the "0 8 & 9". On the other hand 6 & 9 have survived their ambiguities for awhile. But maybe this would a good time to raise Lite's suggestions: á• for ten & á’§ for lev.

http://z13.invisionfree.com/DozensOnlin ... wtopic=996

(Can we find a substitute for nine at the same time? :sigh:)
Calling me young, as well as calling English my not first language, they both offend me! That's annoying. I'm 12 now.
Both are true

 Posts 360
Regular
Ruthe
Regular
Joined: Feb 27 2006, 09:23 PM
I have always thought that the best way to acheive any consensus was to adopt a solution that provides the optimum result with the minimum of disruption to existing systems. I long ago suggested what I believed was such a solution for the character problem for uncial ten and eleven. I provided a document that examines all of the existing suggestions at the time and came to one result.

One of my suggestions was the mirrored 7 also used by icarus on his clockface avatar for uncial eleven. My other suggestion was a flipped digit 4 for uncial ten. Both these characters have no existing uses elsewhere, meet all the requirements specified in my document, were least likely to be mis-identified with existing characters and were uniquely similar to existing digit characters so looked like digits.

I also pointed out that these two forms were able to be represented in existing 7 segement displays with the minimum of disruption needing only minimal programming changes and NO physical alteration to equipment. I was told that this was not needed as 7 segment displays are no impediment as there are not enough in the world to prove a problem, yet I still see multiple implementations of such displays continuing day by day.

Since I suggested both handwritten versions and seven segment versions of these digits, one respondent complained that the flipped 4 character was too hard to write by hand, but was referring to the seven segement version, not the handwritten version! If they had read my document correctly they would have seen that writing the flipped 4 by hand is EASIER than writing a normal digit 4 and can be written WITHOUT lifting the pen (pencil), unlike the normal digit 4!

It was only some time later that I found another compelling reason for BOTH of these suggested characters. If used on a clockface, the suggested character for uncial ten, a flipped digit 4, is diametrically opposite the digit 4 and the therefore is six (6) hours later than 4. so 4 + 6 = the flipped 4, or the uncial 10.

Next, the suggested mirrored digit 7 for uncial 11, is exactly 4 hours after the digit 7. So, likewise, 7 + 4 = the mirrored 7 or uncial 11.

These two suggested characters are therefore easily identified at any time by reference to a suitably notated clock!

I apologize for my inability to show the form of these two digits in text form but trust you can all easily write them for yourselves. I have included a link to an uncial clockface that gives you a view of a clock with the form of characters I suggest for uncial ten and eleven.

I am open to any and all comments, both pro or con, but am still convinced this is the simplest solution to the character problem.
Why a Roman pocket abacus? They used dozenal fractions as their main form of fractions, 12 inches per foot & originally 12 oz per pound (inch=ounce=uncia=1/12). Columns 1 & 2 of the abacus are for dozenal fractions, column two for twelfths and column one, dozenal fractions of a twelfth. Columns 3 through 8 provided a decimal place value system with values from 1s to millions where each lower bead counts as 1 & the upper beads count 5 of a column's base 10 power, Is, Vs, Xs, Ls, Cs ,Ds, Ms etc.

Obsessive poster
Obsessive poster
Joined: Sep 10 2011, 11:27 PM
Ruthe @ Jan 28 2018, 07:27 PM wrote:I have always thought that the best way to acheive any consensus was to adopt a solution that provides the optimum result with the minimum of disruption to existing systems. I long ago suggested what I believed was such a solution for the character problem for uncial ten and eleven. I provided a document that examines all of the existing suggestions at the time and came to one result.
Could you post a link to that document?
One of my suggestions was the mirrored 7 also used by icarus on his clockface avatar for uncial eleven. My other suggestion was a flipped digit 4 for uncial ten.
You mean something like this?

I do like the vertically mirrored four for ten. It could be viewed as a stylized, angular form of the letter d, signifying dec.

The horizontally mirrored seven does not appeal to me as much, perhaps because it's just too evocative of an ordinary seven, getting in the way of internalizing it as an "eleven". On the other hand, a vertically mirrored seven is something like a horizontally mirrored L:

which (for me, at least) seems to do a better job of evoking lev for eleven, without being confused with an actual letter L.

Ruthe, the saving grace is that someone could easily cook up a custom font that supplied these as the glyphs for Unicode positions U+218Ax and U+218Bx, replacing the glyphs for the Pitman characters. That would not disrupt Unicode's decision about what glyphs should appear there, since anyone could simply revert to using a standard font.
As of 1202/03/01[z]=2018/03/01[d] I use:
ten,eleven = ↊↋, ᘔƐ, ӾƐ, XE or AB.
Base-neutral base annotations
Systematic Dozenal Nomenclature
Primel Metrology
Western encoding (not by choice)
Greasemonkey + Mathjax + PrimelDozenator
(Links to these and other useful topics are in my index post;
click on my user name and go to my "Website" link)

 Posts 317
Regular
DavidKennedy
Regular
Joined: Sep 13 2016, 11:44 AM
Ruthe, it's good to see that you are here again and read your judgements on numerical glyphs. It is clear that your views are based on objectives and reason so can be respected, although not all may agree with each of my rational conclusions. I saw the flipped digit four being used for ten in a dozenal document. I agree that proposals for numerical glyphs should be compatible with the seven segment modular displays. The segmental displays are still used for example in pocket calculators and are a quite efficient way of displaying numbers, which is why calculators can run for so long on so little energy, so I expect they shall remain in use well into the future. I designed glyphs for the numbers ten and eleven as part of a distinguishable against decimal set. They had to look different from other numerals and letters, but I was not afraid of them being referential to numbers that people could recognise. At first, for the digit ten, I chose a sign like a sideways omega. When Wendy suggested that glyphs could be capable of lower case forms, I modified this to having a partial ascender and decender with the result of it looking like an open thorn. But some time after I first proposed the set of glyphs, the dozenal societies decided to have a consensus on Pitman glyphs in order to get Unicodes for them. When I found that out, I reluctantly changed the symbol for ten to a closed version of the Pitman turned digit two in order to please others. On objective principles, I still think that the open thorn is a better option as it is less likely to be confused with another digit, and I permit both as variations. My symbol for the eleven also now resembles the Pitman character and the syllable "el" used for this number.

I actually have designed a second distinguishable against decimal set of dozenal glyphs that can be represented in seven segment modular elements. Some of them appear at
DavidKennedy @ Oct 26 2016, 12:28 PM wrote:

Code: Select all

  _       _   _           _   _            _   _
&#124;   &#124;  _&#124;  _&#124;  _&#124; &#124;_  &#124;_  &#124; &#124;  &#124;_&#124;  _&#124;   &#124; &#124; &#124;
&#124;_&#124;  _&#124; &#124;     &#124; &#124; &#124;  _&#124; &#124; &#124;   &#124;  &#124;_&#124;   &#124;  _&#124; &#124; &#124;

(Dozenal Numerals, modification/separate identity)

The second set now is

Code: Select all

  _       _   _            _   _             _   _
&#124; &#124;   &#124;  _&#124;  _&#124; &#124;_&#124; &#124;_   &#124;_  &#124; &#124;  &#124;_&#124;  _&#124;   _&#124; &#124; &#124;
_&#124;  _&#124; &#124;     &#124; &#124;    _&#124;  &#124; &#124;   &#124;  &#124;_&#124;   &#124;  &#124;_&#124; &#124; &#124;

The symbols for six and seven are the same in both sets. The symbol for eleven here is capital Greek lambda. These symbols might not display correctly in all renditions.
-- David Kennedy
Double negative is a plus

Obsessive poster
Obsessive poster
Joined: Sep 10 2011, 11:27 PM
DavidKennedy @ Jan 28 2018, 10:11 PM wrote: But some time after I first proposed the set of glyphs, the dozenal societies decided to have a consensus on Pitman glyphs in order to get Unicodes for them.
That is not exactly how it happened. The dozenal societies did not decide on a consensus in order to influence the Unicode Consortium to recognize transdecimal digits. The Unicode Consortium decided that the usage of transdecimal digits by dozenalists was an application of symbols with enough of a history and a constituency that it was something worth recognizing within the Unicode standard. So they allocated a couple of code points for that. But when they decided which glyphs to recognize for those code-points, they looked to the fact that Pitman's characters had an established history going back to the Nineteenth Century, had been used by most of the members of the British society for dozens of years, and had even been used by some members of the American society. So the Unicode Consortium deemed the Pitman glyphs the most characteristic of "dozenalist" usage, and recognized them in the standard.

The DSA does not now have, nor has ever had, a policy of officially endorsing any particular digit set, nor any particular nomenclature, nor any particular metrologies, nor what have you. I can't speak for the DSGB, but I believe they take the same stance. The societies are just about educating people about the benefits of dozenal base.

However, as a practical matter, now that Unicode supports transdecimal digits, to the extent that many fonts now support them, it would be foolhardy not to accept the Pitmans at least as a default, and to have a consensus that this is a good idea. That doesn't mean people can't experiment with other suggestions, like Ruthe's here. It just means that all dozenalists ought to recognize Pittman's digits as part of our default repertoire.

One thing the Unicode Consortium did not do, was consider the notion of an entirely separate-identity set for dozenal base, nor for any other base. Because in point of fact, there is no constituency now, nor has there ever been a constitutency, for such a usage of symbols, neither for dozenal nor any other base. The behavior of the overwhelming majority of people using any kind of alternate base is quite the opposite, in fact. The Unicode Consortium is not in the business of recognizing idiosyncratic usages of symbols with no significant following.

And all of these developments most certainly predate DK joining this forum. He had absolutely no influence in this matter either way.
As of 1202/03/01[z]=2018/03/01[d] I use:
ten,eleven = ↊↋, ᘔƐ, ӾƐ, XE or AB.
Base-neutral base annotations
Systematic Dozenal Nomenclature
Primel Metrology
Western encoding (not by choice)
Greasemonkey + Mathjax + PrimelDozenator
(Links to these and other useful topics are in my index post;
click on my user name and go to my "Website" link)

 Posts 615
Dozens Disciple
Paul Rapoport
Dozens Disciple
Joined: Dec 26 2012, 01:59 AM
FWIW, to help with the non-standard standard, so to speak, I decided to use the Pitman characters on all my materials, including clocks and calendars on the Internet. I don't like them as much as Jean Essig's, for example, but I think it's useful to get behind the Pitman, which, as Kode has pointed out, have the history that no other pair of characters does.

I don't see why the discussion of characters shouldn't continue, although some of it has gone on before, and in a wider world, that discussion has sometimes been a distraction. Everyone has his/her own idea for undeniably, unarguably, absolutely the best characters, presentation of which may submerge more substantial discussions about dozenals.

Regardless, there's almost no agreement, and I see no reason why there should be. Yet the particular decision of the two major societies is important, even if it isn't a (firm) standard, along with the Unicode implementation, as has been pointed out.

 Posts 773
Dozens Disciple
Oschkar
Dozens Disciple
Joined: Nov 19 2011, 01:07 AM
In fact, Pitman’s digits would have gotten into Unicode regardless of their continued use by dozenalists. Karl Pentzlin’s proposal did include the Pitman dozenal digits, but almost as an afterthought; the main purpose of the document was to encode the English Phonotypic Alphabet so that Pitman’s works may be digitized as is, without converting them to standard English spelling, undermining their purpose. Even if the use of turned-two and turned-three for ten and eleven had stopped at Pitman’s contemporaries, they would likely have still been encoded, due to the boundaries set for the proposal. It might have taken longer for them to be accepted by the Consortium (for reference, some of Pitman’s punctuation marks are still unencoded), but the content of the proposal would have been exactly the same.

 Posts 360
Regular
Ruthe
Regular
Joined: Feb 27 2006, 09:23 PM
Kodegadulo @ Jan 28 2018, 08:28 PM wrote:
Ruthe @ Jan 28 2018, 07:27 PM wrote:I provided a document that examines all of the existing suggestions at the time and came to one result.
Could you post a link to that document?
I have found my original Symbols.doc file.
One of my suggestions was the mirrored 7 also used by icarus on his clockface avatar for uncial eleven. My other suggestion was a flipped digit 4 for uncial ten.
You mean something like this?

Exactly
I have taken a copy of Paul Rapoport's clockface and mirrored and flipped the 7 a 4 and replaced the 11 and 10 to show the aesthetics of those two glyphs.

Uncial Clockface
I do like the vertically mirrored four for ten. It could be viewed as a stylized, angular form of the letter d, signifying dec.

The horizontally mirrored seven does not appeal to me as much, perhaps because it's just too evocative of an ordinary seven, getting in the way of internalizing it as an "eleven". On the other hand, a vertically mirrored seven is something like a horizontally mirrored L:

which (for me, at least) seems to do a better job of evoking lev for eleven, without being confused with an actual letter L.
I don't mind your suggestion for uncial 11 but would need to search existing glyphs to see if it clashes with an existing use. I did do a search for my version and could not find a symbol like it for which it could be mistaken.
Ruthe, the saving grace is that someone could easily cook up a custom font that supplied these as the glyphs for Unicode positions U+218Ax and U+218Bx, replacing the glyphs for the Pitman characters. That would not disrupt Unicode's decision about what glyphs should appear there, since anyone could simply revert to using a standard font.
I do think the two uncial societies should form a group to specify an addition to Unicode for a codespace for number values as a contiguous series for at least 0-15 to allow for future use with mathematical routines that could be written for later non decimal based mathematics. To leave it till later could jeopardize the availability of such a codespace in Unicode.

P.S. Please dont criticize my spelling of jeopardize as being the American spellig, it ISN'T. It is the more correct spelling for such words that denote a change, alteration, amendment of anything and uses the more correct "ize" ending from the Greek with that meaning of change. The Americans took that spelling with them when they first emigrated, and we in Britain since around 1900 have adopted the French spelling with "s" in place of "z".
Why a Roman pocket abacus? They used dozenal fractions as their main form of fractions, 12 inches per foot & originally 12 oz per pound (inch=ounce=uncia=1/12). Columns 1 & 2 of the abacus are for dozenal fractions, column two for twelfths and column one, dozenal fractions of a twelfth. Columns 3 through 8 provided a decimal place value system with values from 1s to millions where each lower bead counts as 1 & the upper beads count 5 of a column's base 10 power, Is, Vs, Xs, Ls, Cs ,Ds, Ms etc.

Obsessive poster
Obsessive poster
Joined: Sep 10 2011, 11:27 PM
Ruthe @ Jan 31 2018, 01:43 AM wrote: P.S. Please dont criticize my spelling of jeopardize as being the American spellig, it ISN'T.
I wouldn't dream of criticizing you for that, Ruthe. Now, if we could just convince all you folks over there to go back to the original Roman spelling of color, honor, favor, humor ...

EDIT: Um, rather than derail this thread into a discussion of British vs. American spelling, let's move any follow ups to here.
As of 1202/03/01[z]=2018/03/01[d] I use:
ten,eleven = ↊↋, ᘔƐ, ӾƐ, XE or AB.
Base-neutral base annotations
Systematic Dozenal Nomenclature
Primel Metrology
Western encoding (not by choice)
Greasemonkey + Mathjax + PrimelDozenator
(Links to these and other useful topics are in my index post;
click on my user name and go to my "Website" link)

 Posts 615
Dozens Disciple
Paul Rapoport
Dozens Disciple
Joined: Dec 26 2012, 01:59 AM
The clock face looks fine with Ruthe's numerals, except that he used a different font for the mirrored, rotated 4. The mirrored 7 uses the correct font.

On the 7-segment debate: we just bought a new stove/range/cooker/whatever. The digits for time and temperature etc. are all 7-segment.

Better alternatives exist. General Electric may be too cheap to use them, at least in the mid-range model we chose. I don't know what more expensive models use.

For my watch output, I didn't go near 7 segments. Unfortunately, as in many others, in this case being overrated goes with being overused.

 Posts 360
Regular
Ruthe
Regular
Joined: Feb 27 2006, 09:23 PM
Paul Rapoport @ Feb 3 2018, 03:01 AM wrote:The clock face looks fine with Ruthe's numerals, except that he used a different font for the mirrored, rotated 4. The mirrored 7 uses the correct font.
Actually I used the same font for the flipped 4 but cut of the foot as it would look odd at the top. All I did was copy the symbols in my image software and flip the 4 and mirror the 7.
On the 7-segment debate: we just bought a new stove/range/cooker/whatever. The digits for time and temperature etc. are all 7-segment.
I have noticed new fuel pumps that have been installed use a liquid crystal display but with 7 segement displays. I am sure it will be far easier to amend the software on such displays than have desdign and install new hardware, and far cheaper too to add two new glyphs.
Why a Roman pocket abacus? They used dozenal fractions as their main form of fractions, 12 inches per foot & originally 12 oz per pound (inch=ounce=uncia=1/12). Columns 1 & 2 of the abacus are for dozenal fractions, column two for twelfths and column one, dozenal fractions of a twelfth. Columns 3 through 8 provided a decimal place value system with values from 1s to millions where each lower bead counts as 1 & the upper beads count 5 of a column's base 10 power, Is, Vs, Xs, Ls, Cs ,Ds, Ms etc.

 Posts 33
Casual Member
Einmaleins
Casual Member
Joined: Feb 12 2018, 06:58 AM
So the standard numerals - even though they are not so described - will in all probability become the de facto standard. A pity, in a way; people will tend not to bother with thinking about alternatives. Some years back there was a fellow called växan who had several good ideas - but the images are no longer in his posts. I will follow the Pitman digits.

 Posts 615
Dozens Disciple
Paul Rapoport
Dozens Disciple
Joined: Dec 26 2012, 01:59 AM
people will tend not to bother with thinking about alternatives.
There isn't much new in the standardization or not. Whatever deniably standardizing non-standard the two societies have adopted hasn't seemed to lessen others' interest in using or devising other numerals. My point (probably not worth repeating) is that in other discussions (not in this forum), ten's and eleven's appearance has drawn disproportionate attention, to the detriment of other topics.

So, for that matter, has the question of what to name the numerals from ten up. I see posts (again, not here) that assume dek-el-do and do-gro-mo are the world standards. In this forum may be found some worthy solutions to the naming question.

I find both questions worth raising occasionally but am interested more in people's joining those discussions with some awareness of what's already been done. (Unawareness remains understandable, because there are hopefully many newcomers to encourage.)