Bitcoin Forum

Handling of decimal fractions for coins is error prone. I often have to count more than twice the number of zeroes after the dot.

The proposal here is to eliminate the fractional zeros and simply put their count before a symbol.

The result is very concise and improve readability.

Examples:

0.012       becomes 1|12
0.0012      becomes 2|12
0.00012     becomes 3|12
...
0.00000012  becomes 6|12


At a glance, 0.00000124 looks similar to 0.0000124

  BUT

5|124 is clearly different than 4|124
 
The symbol pronunciation is simply "zero(s)".

Example:
  7|8 is pronounced "7 zeros 8" and represent the value 0.00000008

(If the character '|' is not available, then I suggest to use instead a lower case 'z')

I kinda like it!

I like the idea, although just using m and u for milli and micro isn't too bad either.

you're kinda wrong here, there is no need to alterative decimal notanion.
We just need "standard", satoshi's was 0.0000000
now if theres correct amoun of zeroes BEHIND, its easy to distinguish if the coin is worth 100 satoshi's or 1000 satoshi's.

very similar to this... https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=264143.0

How about scientific notation?

0.012       becomes 1.2x10^-2 or 1.2e-2
0.0012      becomes 1.2x10^-3 or 1.2e-3
0.00012     becomes 1.2x10^-4 or 1.2e-4
...
0.00000012  becomes 1.2x10^-7 or 1.2e-7

Thanks. I was not aware of this related work.

One key difference is my proposal reads aloud the same way I am thinking while reading small values on crypto exchanges.

I "count" the number of zero after the dot and process the rest of the number.

digitalindustry put the magnitude second, so you need to think twice about it. First you process the coefficient and then second you shift it in your mind. I have the same problem with scientific notation (in the crypto currency context)... but it might just be me.

Why make up a notation when scientific notation already exists and is well understood by everyone?

I had the same question before coming up with this proposal, and... it did raise another question:

if scientific notation is the solution, then why it is not already in use by crypto exchanges and web sites etc...?

It seems that scientific notation might not come natural to most.

===

Wild Guess: The negative sign in the scientific notation might also be a turn off when used in a currency value... people have feelings   ;)

And your method will come naturally to everyone? The solution is just to use decimal notation, everyone understands it.

Find it confusing

12z2

Tells me there is 2 zeros in front of 12 .

Yours involves people losing a zero somewhere .

Lol "you suggest a lower case z ?"

I'd support your variation on the digitalindustry standard , but don't lose a zero at the front .

Dr goose

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=264143.0

Is this one of those strange cosmic entanglements , or , did I see the future and take your idea ?

If so I apologise for the latter , I see a good idea in the future I like to bring it forward. Well back , actually sideways .

I like the " people have feelings " .

Then as I just posted the simplified version is


z5 z6 z8 z4

Which implicitly means

1z5 1z6 1z8 1z4

And is perfect for pricing .

And will probably end up as the standard.  Depending if we split the reality blockchain .

Thanks for the feedback.

Yes, I think the lower case z is well representative of the word zero. I did favor it over the upper case Z because it might be confused with a 2 in some font.

I guess we will have to disagree for the zero count. The one before the dot is not significant, and when I read such number aloud I do not think of it.

Just to be clear, this proposal is related to the same problem, but it is not a variation "on" your work. It was develop independently and it is typical for similar solutions to show up when a problem is common to many.

Ha ha yes indeed ! { broad thick upper English accent }

It is a common problem  I refer to the quizzical and amusing timing .

I apologised already .

My problem with the zero 0.  Is that exists , it is reality .

1 exists and less than 1 is something under 1 so 0. Exists  . And thus should be notified in a symbolic context .

You are correct, we can't expect a new notation to be understood by most... it has to be learn and nobody is being teach a "point zeros notation".

BUT

The millennial generation are quick at switching to whatever is shorter and faster, and a bunch of zeros is a "problem" in our context. Often the new notation/abbreviations gets quickly adopted from the internet, no school involved. It is in that perspective that it might be OK to try something different.

Time will tell, and this "point zeros notation" might just die with this thread.

(Correction: I was referring only to the death of this proposal. The digitalindustry standard might shine from and beyond its own thread)

I can't understand people re-invented what it is already invented (Scientific Notation)...

So... now I want to propose another change... I will measure the longitude in carrots instead of meters and the weight in elephants instead of kg... welcome to a World without I.S. (International System of units)!!!

Ahhh... and I propose to change all binary system by a ternary numeral system because of the holy trinity.

Anyway... good luck with your proposal, but I will not use it (I like the old fashion scientific notation)  ;)

Thanks for the feedback.

It is obviously not intended as a general purpose replacement to the decimal and scientific notation.

Nobody use the scientific notation in the context of crypto currency, yet everyone knows about scientific notation... so something else might have a shot at it... but it will need all the luck you have to offer  :)

DR Goose i like your proposal - i expect a merger of the two - so in this respect i think you have added invaluably and essentially to the information stream in this regard .

perhaps more so than I the common future thief .

Edit: I agree with you, I'm still upset the US uses inches and pounds, but this won't change soon. Also, teaching people scientific notation (if they didn't learn it in school already) would help everywhere, not just with cryptocurrency. Making some new notation will also make new comers feel confused, as it might deter them if they see a bunch of 6|4 or 4z6 around not.

http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/standards.png

Stop.

Both of you just reinvented scientific notation.

This all seems ok on first glance, but now try to do some very basic math, such as addition and subtraction.
Quick what's 5|221 + 3|5?

Sort of... but it is more like a simple run-length encoding compression of the zeros adapted to a specific purpose.

0.00000012 Coins

is abbreviated to

6|12 Coins

I doubt people prefer reading/typing/buying something like:

1.2e-7 Coins

Case in point, scientific notation is widely known, yet, it is not used by web sites to solve the problem stated in the OP.

Sometimes reinvention is good
===================
Why twitter did not use URLs for their user accounts? It is because they needed something shorter to keep the tweet practical. They were just reinventing the URLs for their specific purpose and it did end up well. Now the meaning of "@someone" or "#subject" is widely understood, but was a total mystery ~7 years ago.

Asking the mobile generation to deal with a bunch of hallucinating zeros or the scientific notation might be an obstacle (IMHO).

Not intended for doing quick mental math... the intent is to shorten the representation on a web page and get the "order of magnitude" at a first glance.

When needed, it is very easy to convert to decimal. You do not need to count with your fingers the 5 zeros on the web page (or was it 6?) to enter 5 zeros on a calculator.

+1 and of course ,  those that wish to continue using scientific or good old 5 or 6 zeros 00000, keep doing that .

As I said it's easy to see the instance where  it's just

z4 z5 z7 z8

Or

The  good Drs

|5 |6 |3 |7

As this would represent

1z4 1z5 1z7 1z8

Or the like on the Drs method , ...

as when pricing something the nominal objective is to make a profit and the owner would likely just round up to the nearest  1 along the closest agreed market line.

I like the idea but I gave it a try and it's not so obvious to do the do basic math quickly with it...

I'm also a bit confused.
You say 3|13 is 0.00013
Then digitalindustry says |13 is like 1|13 which should be 0.013?
So what's 0.13 now?

And if you get 1.0098 coins (1 coin + 2|98), how do you write it in a short way?

just write 0.000 013
and we dont need this notifications

do u use scientific notations with big numbers?
NO
u write 1 000 000 000

so why we need that on small numbers?

While i think scientific notation needs some mental on-the-fly calculation to understand that number, your notation is easier.

But one question:

What about this number 320.0000012 ?
How Someone should write it with your notation?

You might be right, adding spaces might be just enough to solve the readability issue. As a bonus, it facilitate to see the milli/micro boundaries.

I do no agree with that. We usually use k's or m's (1 000 = 1k) to make it easier don't we?

no, not really.

how u would write with m and k this?
123456789,123456789 ?

i would write
123 456 789,123 456 789

Thanks for giving it some thought.

I will just cover the OP proposal here. digitalindustry proposal differ a bit and I would prefer each to be discuss in their own thread to avoid confusion.

0.13   -> 0|13 (but I would just use 0.13 on a website)
0.013  -> 1|13
0.0013 -> 2|13

and so on...

1.0098 -> 1.2|98 (read as-is: 1 dot 2 zeros 98) but frankly I would not use a "point zero notation" for 1 and above. Might be too much to digest.

For CoinBuzz:
320.0000012 -> 320.5|12 (320 dot 5 zeros 12). Working but not pretty.

You're right captain.

But when I see this kind of page: http://middlecoin.com/
I still think something could be done to make it easier/faster to read.

@DrGoose
1.5|98 = 1.0000098
It makes me feel I got 1.5 coin but I actually have only 1.0 :).
When you read fast, it could be disappointing.

I agree... it is just confusing for >= 1

What if we use instead the ASCII of small numbers in a circle (or parenthesis for older 7-bits ASCII)?

0.013  ->   (1)13 -> ①13
0.0013 ->   (2)13 -> ②13
1.0013 -> 1.(2)13 -> 1.②13


Where (n) would still read as "n zeros"

I like the graphic version that simply feel like a "zero" with a multiplier inside.

Just food for thought.

And all this is easier than scientific notation?... OMG!!!

Then I propose other nomenclature...

You have to put  ;D if you have zeros in the left side of the comma (because they are high numbers and those numbers make me happy)

You have to put  >:( if you have zeros in the right side of the comma (because they are lower numbers and those numbers make me unhappy)

and after I propose to use the roman numbers... so... for example:

17000 --> XVII ;D III

0.0005 --> V  >:( III

Definitly I think it would be easier for everyone if all people try to use them

(I promise this is my last participation in this post)

Be happy with your system...

(LOL. Thanks vingaard for your imaginative feedback)

If this is any consolation to the community, I am also almost done on the subject  ;D

I like to bring wild ideas to the table... sometime it turns into something good, sometimes not.

Might be one of these cases going nowhere.

At least the thread did not degenerate in a "my coin needs less zeros than yours" battle   :D