I wrote:
"I think it is clear that if those numbers are entered as amounts of grams, dollars, or euros they should be interpreted as (123 + 456 / 1000). It would be idiotic to assume the user intends to spend 123456 of those things."
David Beroff wrote:
"Mrrrm... Something's just rubbing me the wrong way about contextual
sensitivity in this particular case, especially since I'm not so
sure that such numbers would be "idiotic". I've done e-gold transactions
with five figures of USD, so I don't see it as such a stretch to consider
six. Similarly, e-gold is well suited for very tiny spends, as well."
I said the assumption would be idiotic, not the numbers. I'm talking probability here. But I'll say it without the loaded word "idiotic."
Assume for the sake of discussion that it is possible to spend dollars and euros to three decimal places. (I don't know if e-gold allows this, but I don't see why not.) I believe the following.
If a randomly chosen e-gold user specifies an amount of 123,456 euros it is much more likely that he intends (123 + 456 / 1000) euros rather than 123456. In this case the user is likely to be non-American.
If a randomly chosen e-gold user specifies an amount of 123,456 dollars it is much more likely that he intends (123 + 456 / 1000) dollars rather than 123456. In this case the user is likely to be non-American.
If a randomly chosen e-gold user specifies an amount of 123,456 grams it is much more likely that he intends (123 + 456 / 10000) grams rather than 123456. In this case the user is likely to be non-American.
If a randomly chosen e-gold user specifies an amount of 123.456 euros it is much more likely that he intends (123 + 456 / 1000) euros rather than 123456. In this case the user is likely to be American.
If a randomly chosen e-gold user specifies an amount of 123.456 dollars it is much more likely that he intends (123 + 456 / 1000) dollars rather than 123456. In this case the user is likely to be American.
If a randomly chosen e-gold user specifies a spend of 123.456 grams it is much more likely that he intends (123 + 456 / 1000) grams rather than 123456. In this case the user is likely to be American.
What I am proposing is to follow three principles simultaneously: (1) maximum simplicity, (2) maximal cultural accommodation and (3) follow the course of least potential harm.
If some specifies a spend amount of 123,456 dollars, just assume it's a non-American who wishes to spend (123 + 456 / 1000) dollars. That is much more likely to be correct, and much less likely to cause harm, than assuming it's an American who wishes to spend 123456 dollars. A similar argument applies to the case of dollars and grams.
You simply decree that there can be at most one comma or period in a number, and any number of digits or spaces. It would simply be an error to say "123,456.789". Instead, you'd have to say "123456.789" or "123456,789" or "123 456.789" etc. etc.
I mean really, how often is it important to use a damn separator character in an e-gold spend amount? How many kilogram or microgram spends do people really do, and would it kill them to just run the numbers together or learn to use a space?
The rule is simple, accommodative, and benign.
-- Patrick
--- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Use e-gold's Secure Randomized Keyboard (SRK) when accessing your e-gold account(s) via the web and shopping cart interfaces to help thwart keystroke loggers and common viruses.
