4 ms·
What problems would arise if they skipped numbers that exceed the 6 characters? Like, go from 37 to 39 (XXXIX). Then you have a solid run until you run into 78.
by function_seven 7y ago
What problems would arise if they skipped numbers that exceed the 6 characters? Like, go from 37 to 39 (XXXIX). Then you have a solid run until you run into 78.
And 78 ought to be enough for anyone.
- yorwba 7y agoThe Dog Name Check Tool is very clear on that matter: "Roman numerals must not be included at the end of the dog's name. The AKC reserves the right to assign roman numerals for identification purposes." "The name you have chosen contains the restricted word 'XXXIX' which cannot be used." However... "King XXXX has been verified for use for this breed." So numbers from 40 onwards are not rejected by the automatic check. I don't know whether an application would be handled by a human who might notice this, though.
- williamdclt 7y ago40 is XL, not XXXX. "King XL" is rejected (and sounds like a condom brand)
- yorwba 7y agoOk, it seems like they only recognize subtractive notation. Nonetheless, numbers from L onward seem to work, so if you want that distinct "roman numeral" look, you could choose "King LXVII".
- ratmice 7y agoFor some reason i would be suprised if they check for unicode roman numerals, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numerals_in_Unicode#Roman_numerals https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numerals_in_Unicode#Roman_nume...
- yorwba 7y agoThey don't check for them, they just forcibly convert them into ASCII by taking the lowest byte of the Unicode code point, turning "ⅠⅡⅢⅣⅤⅥⅦⅧⅨⅩⅪⅫⅬⅭⅮⅯⅰⅱⅲⅳⅴⅵⅶⅷⅸⅹⅺⅻⅼⅽⅾⅿ" into "`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~\x7f". A few of these characters get rejected, though curiously not the last one, which is nonprintable.
- jobigoud 7y agoIf you skip numbers then you could go way higher using the bigger ones. Say "MXXIV" or "MMXL".