Cistercian Numbers(omniglot.com)
70 points bydebo_10 hours ago |8 comments
iguana_shine4 minutes ago
It's pretty cool but I'm surprised there wasn't confusion among the 2s (2 & 200, 20 & 2000) all the other symbols had enough to make it clear which side they're on, but the closer the 2-notch gets to the centre, the more ambiguous it gets. Could even be confused with a 1 if you're not careful
tangus8 hours ago
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

bobbiechen8 hours ago
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.

jhncls4 hours ago
In a Numberphile video [0], Alex Bellos also uses a triangle for 5.

[0]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9p55Qgt7Ciw

autoexec7 hours ago
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.
debo_8 hours ago
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.
culi4 hours ago
I wish the 6 was a triangle in the other direction instead
somat1 hour ago
I am a little sad that bare zero is not represented. This is my first exposure to Cistercian numbers but it looks like a unadorned staff would fit for the bare zero.

The whole thing is a lot of fun, feels like a Myst puzzle. Or more accuratly, I don't think Myst had a number puzzle but Riven did and I recently picked up Obduction and it had one, So probably fairer to say a Cyan type puzzle as they appear to love creating wierd numeric representations.

onirom2 hours ago
did a small raw binary-like implementation of an extended (base-16) version : https://www.onirom.fr/wiki/snippets/#JavaScript_:_Extended_C...
beratbozkurt02 hours ago
Actually, it would automatically translate when we scan it with the camera, like Google Translate.
dcanelhas7 hours ago
Shouldn't 523 in that list of "other numbers" actually be 522?
poulpy1237 hours ago
You're right
klondike_klive7 hours ago
Wow, it's a while since I've seen one of those lists of hundreds of vampires that you have to deselect!