Re: periodic hexadecimal reminder

[mark@kli.org]

--- In lojban@y..., Rob Speer <rob@t...> wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 27, 2001 at 06:02:34PM -0400, Craig wrote:
> > No, you could use radix-1. Radix-1+1 = radix, and is always 
pano. Also, once
> > you get to trying to say base 17 lojban has problems.
> 
> Once you get to base 17, you have to use a different base to talk 
about the
> digits _anyway_, so express the radix in that base.
> 
> The only problem I see with bases 11-16 in Lojban is that there's 
no way (yet)
> to abbreviate dau-vai, as the digits 0-9 abbreviate no-so. Though 
for base 12
> (if I remember the digits right) * could be 'dau' and # could be 
'fei'. This
> also provides names for these characters (daubu, feibu). But are 
there 4
> arbitrary characters left for the other digits? (Remember, A-F are 
taken.)

{sorry if this is a duplicate}

I don't understand the last question here. What other digits? In 
base-12, there are only 12 digits: 0123456789*#. Arbitrary 
characters for hex instead of C-F? Well, why mess with tradition? 
OK, to be fair, I'm not personally really happy with A-F, but that's 
pretty much irrelevant. A number is a string of PA words, not a 
string of symbols. If people choose to write {dau} as "A" when 
talking hexadecimal and "*" when talking dozenal (or even "~" in the 
little-known/nonexistent Undecimal Society's conventions), what do I 
care? If you're abbreviating lerfu/me'ovla with symbols in written 
Lojban, you're already taking things for granted. 0-9 are pretty 
well-accepted, but anything beyond that you have to assume the 
reader knows what symbology you're using (in which case it doesn't 
matter if it's inconsistent with others) or you have to tell the 
reader explicitly (in which case it also doesn't matter). What I 
mean is, Lojban is/should be silent on this, as it touches on 
conventions that don't concern it: the only *official* symbol for 
{dau} in Lojban is {dau}. Similarly, if you're in some strange 
situation where you're talking about hex *digits* (as symbols), it 
would be correct to use {daubu} for hex A and not .abu. But unless 
you're among dyed-in-the-wool dozenalists (and modern ones at that: 
dau is also written as X in duodecimal), using {daubu} for "*" 
outside of duodecimal context would be as reasonable as using 
{daubu} for "A" outside of hexadecimal context.

~mark