L'octidi 8 prairial, an CCXXV, gwmfms6@openmailbox.org a écrit : > A lot of Europe does it, and it is wrong! It goes back quite a while to when > it was fashionable to use a dot (.) as a symbol for multiplication. So > Europe stopped using a dot to signal a decimal point to avoid confusion > (they should have stopped stopped using a dot as a symbol for > multiplication). In the U.S. and G.B. an X was used for multiplication > symbol so they continued on using a dot for decimal (as it should be). What glyph is used as a separator does not really matter. What really matter is that it is convenient and everybody uses the same. We could have settled for a heart-shaped symbol, it would have worked. In this matter, considerations such as "preserving local cultures" are irrelevant. It is a matter of communication, an even of (slightly) technical communication. Convenience and unambiguity are paramount. Hence the "everybody uses the same" condition. Convenience sets a few rules. The most important of these is: the decimal separator, which has a semantic role, must be much more visible than the thousand separator, which has only an aesthetic role. Thus, dot for decimal and comma for thousand is stupid. I suggest to apply the following rules, whenever you are free to chose your rules: - Be liberal in what you accept: understand both dots and commas, do not start a pedantic rant if you get a text with the "wrong" one. - In "casual" computerized text, especially monospace, use dot for decimal and no thousand separator. - In typeset text, use dot for decimal and a thin space for thousands (possibly: only if the range of the numbers exceeds 9999, i.e. no thousand separator for years for example). - In hand-written text, the visibility of the dot is not reliable enough, use a comma for decimal. And a small space for thousand. Regards, -- Nicolas George
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature