21 Apr
1999
21 Apr
'99
1:10 p.m.
I have found a reference which has some rules for constructing
roman numerals.
Firstly, four of a given numeral is okay, but five or more is
not. This allows VIIII to be valid.
You must use the largest numeral at a given stage, so for 15,
you don't write VVV, you write XV.
Numerals of a lower value, when written in front of a higher
valued numeral subtract their value from the higher valued
numeral.
Further rules for the subtraction:
o Only I X and C can be used in this way. V, L and D
cannot (nor can M)
o Only one smaller numeral can be written first. So
XIIX is not valid for 18.
o The lower numeral must be no less than a tenth of the
value of the higher numeral.
o It specifically states that each power of ten is handled
separately, and uses the example that 49 is NOT IL, it is
correctly XLIX.
These are the rules I have used in my routine...
Megan Gentry
Former RT-11 Developer
+--------------------------------+-------------------------------------+
| Megan Gentry, EMT/B, PP-ASEL | Internet (work): gentry!zk3.dec.com |
| Unix Support Engineering Group | (home): mbg!world.std.com |
| Compaq Computer Corporation | addresses need '@' in place of '!' |
| 110 Spitbrook Rd. ZK03-2/T43 | URL: http://world.std.com/~mbg/ |
| Nashua, NH 03062 | "pdp-11 programmer - some assembler |
| (603) 884 1055 | required." - mbg |
+--------------------------------+-------------------------------------+
21 Apr
21 Apr
4:57 p.m.
I have found a reference which has some rules for
constructing
roman numerals.
Any reference identification ?
Firstly, four of a given numeral is okay, but five or
more is
not. This allows VIIII to be valid.
Depending on the source - the quad form (up to 4 repeeted
Numerals) is only valid in a context where the subtraction
rule is _not_ allowed
You must use the largest numeral at a given stage, so
for 15,
you don't write VVV, you write XV.
check
Numerals of a lower value, when written in front of a
higher
valued numeral subtract their value from the higher valued
numeral.
check
Further rules for the subtraction:
o Only I X and C can be used in this way. V, L and D
cannot (nor can M)
maybe check
http://www.geocities.com/~source00/cpp-roman.htm
where this rule described diferently - also his
second rule is confusing.
o Only one smaller numeral can be written first. So
XIIX is not valid for 18.
debending on the context again, there are examples of historic
usage of this form - althrough all rules/frameworks of rules I
know also prohibit this.
o The lower numeral must be no less than a tenth of
the
value of the higher numeral.
I'm still missing this rule
o It specifically states that each power of ten is
handled
separately, and uses the example that 49 is NOT IL, it is
correctly XLIX.
Check maybe
http://rcswww.urz.tu-dresden.de/~wegehenk/typo/roemisch.html
It is discusion for typographic usage (and in German, but the
point should be easy to get).
Always remember, The roman system was made to save space - engraving
less strokes is important (good examples are always coins and officia
letters - or can you dechipher IMP CAES PONT MAX TR P C P P ? (*))
One thing to add: the Rule where 4 adjouning Numerals are prohibited
wasn't hard until the 6th century (maybe it didnt exist ?).
(*) Imperator Caesar Ponifex Maximus Tribunicia Potestate Consul Pater Patriae
as found on very common Augustus (Octavius) denars - and to enhance the
task, the letters are not as nice seperated as I have written them :)
Gruss
H.
Also nice page at
http://olympiads.win.tue.nl/acm-arch/ProblemSetArchive/B_VV_Asian/1995/prob…
They did almost the same as we - just the problem discription was a bit better.
--
Stimm gegen SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/de/
Vote against SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/en/
Votez contre le SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/fr/
Ich denke, also bin ich, also gut
HRK
3:59 p.m.
New subject: Roman numerals
At 09:58 PM 4/21/99 +0001, Hans Franke wrote:
And no doubt some poor slave just finished chisling in all the closing
stock prices for the Roman Stock Exchange and some spelling weenie piped up
and said only, "You misspelled 18 on line 30 there."
--Chuck
o Only one
smaller numeral can be written first. So
XIIX is not valid for 18.
debending on the context again, there are examples of historic
usage of this form - althrough all rules/frameworks of rules I
know also prohibit this. 
4 p.m.
New subject: Roman numerals
And no doubt some poor slave just finished chisling in
all the closing
stock prices for the Roman Stock Exchange and some spelling weenie piped up
and said only, "You misspelled 18 on line 30 there."
and said only, "You misspelled XVIII on line XXX there."
6:06 p.m.
New subject: Now OT: Re: Roman numerals
> And no doubt some poor slave just finished
chisling in all the closing
> stock prices for the Roman Stock Exchange and some spelling weenie piped up
> and said only, "You misspelled 18 on line 30 there."
and said only, "You misspelled XVIII on line XXX
there."
Now we know where his family went after there was no longer
a roman stock exchange :)
Gruss
H.
--
Stimm gegen SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/de/
Vote against SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/en/
Votez contre le SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/fr/
Ich denke, also bin ich, also gut
HRK
9395
days inactive
9395
days old
4 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
cisin＠xenosoft.com -
cmcmanis＠mcmanis.com -
Hans.Franke＠mch20.sbs.de -
mbg＠world.std.com