Message-ID: <44E57D00.1090608@russisk.no>
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2006 10:40:32 +0200
From: Leif Halvard Silli <lhs@russisk.no>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.8.1b1) Gecko/20060724 Thunderbird/2.0a1 Mnenhy/0.7.4.666
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Cyrillic TeX Users Group <CyrTeX-en@vsu.ru>
Subject: Re: Cyrillic alphabetical enumaration
References: <list-25640770@relay1.vsu.ru> <list-25653773@relay1.vsu.ru>
In-Reply-To: <list-25653773@relay1.vsu.ru>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Oliver Corff 18.08.2006 07:29:   ­  
> > For instance, is the ?? (io/IO) used in alphabetical enumeration? I 
> > suppose not. But perhaps there are different usage?
> > 
> > Else, all leters are used, I suppose (except hard and soft sign), and in 
> > upper and lower-case?
>
>
> The problem is that several standards seem to be in use; some include
> io, others don't. In general, hard and soft sign are excluded. Have a look
> at the counters provided in MonTeX (on CTAN).
>   


Thanks Oliver. I checked the MonTeX and it contained a "conservative" 
list with 28 enumerative letters. (It excluded IO, Short I and dark/low 
Ď (Yery).) Is it Ťsafeť to recommend this format as a Ťdefaultť 
numeration format for Russian texts?

My view is that I find the MonTeX list Ťlogicalť. The IO is very similar 
to the IE - so exluding one of them is therefore logical. The Short I is 
very similar to I - so out with one of them too. And the dark/low Ď 
(Yery) is never first in a [russian] word - so out.  This format is also 
logical from another point: it is common to take out the IO. But when 
you do that, then it is also logical to no treat the short I and the 
dark/low Ď (Yery) any better :-). (On could perhaps argue about Shcha 
and Sha aslo - the look very similar also ...)

However, the MonTeX format must be said to be a 
conservative/elegant/logical enumeration form. I will call it a format 
for _enumeration_. But not a format for _sorting_. When sorting a phone 
catalogue or similar, then one will be both seldom names and forreign 
names. Thus when enumerating a sorted list of all possible names, all 
letters might be needed. (On the other side, Norwegian never use XYZ in 
native words. But still we use these letters in our lists ...)

So the aboslute best thing would be - I think - to operate with two 
different formats: The conservative format, and a complete format with 
all letters except soft and hard sign.

Agree? Any comments would be appreciated. I have Ťluredť a software 
developer into be supporting Russian list/enumartion format. So now I 
need to explain him how that format looks like.
-- 
leif