Editing Talk:1669: Planespotting

Jump to: navigation, search
Ambox notice.png Please sign your posts with ~~~~

Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.

The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision Your text
Line 3: Line 3:
 
How would one even pronounce "Mk. IVII"?  IV is 4, VII is 7.  I could see an argument for treating it as a really bizarre way to say 6.  Or, if we treat it as two distinct digits (as opposed to a two-digit number), it could be either "1-7" or "4-2".
 
How would one even pronounce "Mk. IVII"?  IV is 4, VII is 7.  I could see an argument for treating it as a really bizarre way to say 6.  Or, if we treat it as two distinct digits (as opposed to a two-digit number), it could be either "1-7" or "4-2".
 
   
 
   
βˆ’
: "Usage in ancient Rome varied greatly and remained inconsistent in medieval and modern times." But AFAIK each numeral only stood for a fixed amount, never for a "digit" (in the sense that its value could specify ones or tens depending on its position). So six ((5 - 1) + 1 + 1) is a plausible interpretation, though definitely not standard; but 17 or 42 would be treating Roman numerals as if they were Arabic. [[User:Huttarl|Huttarl]] ([[User talk:Huttarl|talk]]) 16:03, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
+
: "Usage in ancient Rome varied greatly and remained inconsistent in medieval and modern times." But AFAIK each numeral only stood for a fixed amount, never for a "digit" (in the sense that its value could specify ones or tens depending on its position). So six (4 + 1 + 1) is a likely interpretation, though definitely not standard; but 17 or 42 would be treating Roman numerals as if they were Arabic. [[User:Huttarl|Huttarl]] ([[User talk:Huttarl|talk]]) 16:03, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
  
 
:: You're correct; in Roman numerals, there is not a concept of "this is an I, in the hundreds place, so it's really a 100".  If you mean 100, that's always C.  Hence the phrasing "two distinct digits (as opposed to a two-digit number).  [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.11|108.162.221.11]] 14:16, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
 
:: You're correct; in Roman numerals, there is not a concept of "this is an I, in the hundreds place, so it's really a 100".  If you mean 100, that's always C.  Hence the phrasing "two distinct digits (as opposed to a two-digit number).  [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.11|108.162.221.11]] 14:16, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Please note that all contributions to explain xkcd may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see explain xkcd:Copyrights for details). Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!

To protect the wiki against automated edit spam, we kindly ask you to solve the following CAPTCHA:

Cancel | Editing help (opens in new window)

Template used on this page: