Re: fractions and ASCII codes

hank Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> *Not* in RG:ttP(3rd printing, 2nd ed., 5/79), see
> page 41 where engines 158-165 are listed as Class
> 45 1/2. Same is used in all D&RG documentation I
> have ever seen.


Do you see a difference between typing out 1/2 versus using the ASCII code for ½? I regard them as identical.

I expect fractions were likely the usual notation during the 1870's. In the modern calculator-ruled world decimals have largely supplanted the use of fractions in regular writing, but back then most folks were accustomed to using fractions first. That doesn't rule out the use of decimals, however, and I haven't personally seen 1870's era D&RG internal documentation to confirm one way or the other. So class 45.5, class 45 1/2, class 45½, class 45 and one-half...take your pick. I think in my own writing I've used all of those variants interchangeably at one time or another.