[HN Gopher] Cistercian Numbers
___________________________________________________________________
Cistercian Numbers
Author : debo_
Score : 53 points
Date : 2026-02-18 16:37 UTC (6 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.omniglot.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.omniglot.com)
| tangus wrote:
| My minuscule pet peeve is that having only one source where the
| number 5 is depicted with a triangle (all others show it as a
| separated segment, like the number 6 but shorter), that's how
| every article or library draws it. It's all because the guy who
| wrote a book about them saw that source first so he based his
| figures on it.
|
| Here's a small summary about the numbers with many examples:
| https://www.unicode.org/L2/L2020/20290-cistercian-digits.pdf
| debo_ wrote:
| It would never have occurred to me that anyone would want to
| get these into a Unicode standard. This document you linked is
| excellent, thank you.
| bobbiechen wrote:
| Being first matters :')
|
| I wrote a font for these, which does use the triangle-5 and the
| vertical layout: https://bobbiec.github.io/cistercian-font.html
| (recent discussion here:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46939312)
|
| And my associated writeup:
| https://digitalseams.com/blog/making-a-font-with-9999-ligatu...
| .
|
| As mentioned in the blog, I think the horizontal layout makes
| more sense too (in terms of writing order). But just like the
| triangle-5, the vertical layout is more commonly seen, so
| that's what I stuck with.
| autoexec wrote:
| It might not be accurate but it does seem like it'd be easy to
| mistake a 5 and 6 without the triangle. Especially when the
| characters are being hurriedly written by hand. If I were going
| to use this system, I'd be sticking with the triangle.
| culi wrote:
| I wish the 6 was a triangle in the other direction instead
| jhncls wrote:
| In a Numberphile video [0], Alex Bellos also uses a triangle
| for 5.
|
| [0]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9p55Qgt7Ciw
| klondike_klive wrote:
| Wow, it's a while since I've seen one of those lists of hundreds
| of vampires that you have to deselect!
| dcanelhas wrote:
| Shouldn't 523 in that list of "other numbers" actually be 522?
| poulpy123 wrote:
| You're right
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2026-02-18 23:00 UTC)