Disputatio Formulae:Numerus articulatus

Four-digit numbers

Disputatio accepta a: Disputatio:Palmae § Formula:Num – Locus opportunior --Grufo

@Grufo, scribebas "I modified {{num}} to match thinsp, but I restore the former because it is better for search engines and copy&paste operations " OK, but the formula wrongly inserts a thinspace in four-digit numbers and therefore shouldn't be used until it's fixed. According to information we received some years ago, ISO does not insert a thinspace in four-digit numbers. Incidentally, that's one good reason to use color to distinguish years from nonyears, as 1945 (printing blue) is a year, while 1945 (printing black) might be the population of a small town. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 11:04, 1 Augusti 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, Iacobus, I did not know about the four-digit rule. I have updated {{Numerus articulatus}} accordingly. However I do not know how the template should behave in case of four digits + decimal part. This is the current behavior:

• {{Num|1932}}

  ↳ 1932

• {{Num|1932.5}}

  ↳ 1932.5

• {{Num|1932.23485}}

  ↳ 1932.23485

No idea if it is the correct one. --Grufo (disputatio) 11:29, 1 Augusti 2023 (UTC)

Apparently the document that rules about the thousand separator is ISO 31-0, but the PDF is behind a paywall. However I might have found the solution concerning decimal numbers on English Wikipedia at Decimal separator § Exceptions to digit grouping (emphasis mine):

Likewise, some manuals of style state that thousands separators should not be used in normal text for numbers from 1000 to 9999 inclusive where no decimal fractional part is shown (in other words, for four-digit whole numbers), whereas others use thousands separators and others use both.

So, apparently, after my last fix this template behaves correctly. --Grufo (disputatio) 12:52, 4 Augusti 2023 (UTC)