Re: [sc-dev] Proposal of a new format character from engineer's/scientist's prospective

On Thu, Jan 22, 2004 at 09:15:32AM -0500, Kohei Yoshida wrote:
Hi Niklas,

On Thu, 2004-01-22 at 04:58, Niklas Nebel wrote:

Somehow this is getting out of hand. For maximum flexibility, what you 
need is the possibility of more conditions in a number format, and an 
arbitrary scaling factor.

I re-read your comment.  Now I see what you mean here.  So, instead of
totally abandoning the current scheme, your suggestion is to start from
the current, but make it more flexible so that we are not restricted to
the current three condition limit (separated by semi-colons) and scaling
factor that's powers of 3.  Do I understand it correct?

Hmm, I'm not at all sure that is a good way to go.  Ignoring how we
would express arbitrary scaling that leads us towards
    [>1000]0 km;[>1]0 m;[>.01]0 cm; ....
Which is seems untenably complex to me.  Even the other proposal of
seemed prone to error.  Our goals seem to be
    a) select from a hard coded set of prefix/scale factors
    b) provide a unitstring with no semantic knowledge of what that
       unit is.
    b) provide a min/max useful unit prefix
    c) avoid using a less common prefix sometimes (dm)

[%scale_factor_set;max_prefix;min_prefix;comma seperated list of exclusions]
So your example would be
The main limitation here would be localization.  Are there any
translations that use different names for 'si' or its associated
prefixes ?  This is more general than my generic 'use si' approach,
but less powerful than your pre-prefix selection.

    There is a limit of 3 conditions within a format string ?
    That's silly.

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]