Talk:Spelling of ordinal numbers: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
(added comments.) |
No edit summary |
||
Line 2:
: I used the definition or ordinal numbers found elsewhere (as used here for counting words in a sentence); I hadn't even thought of equating ordinal numbers to be cardinal numbers (I don't even think they are equivalent). In particular, the definitions that are used here for this Rosetta Code task are human-centric, not computer-centric (such as counting doors, for instance, in another Rosetta Code task). This problem/riddle/puzzle/task is an old one, and people start counting the first word in that long sentence as, well, the first word. People use unity based numbering system for counting. To do otherwise would re-define the original sentence as used in the premise sentence. This problem has been "solved" before computers were used for such things, and the use of computers shouldn't change the construction of that (never-ending) sentence. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 09:38, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
: "People use unity based numbering system for counting" does not mean that people (often other people) do not use zero based numbering systems for counting.
: That said, if you are using a unity based numbering system for counting, zero is indicated by the absence of a count. --[[User:Rdm|Rdm]] ([[User talk:Rdm|talk]]) 10:35, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
| |||