From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_40,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,60973b026c6e423d X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) Subject: Re: the term "pound sign" (was: help: character to integer) Date: 1996/10/11 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 188742802 references: <53blbk$6va@krusty.irvine.com> <53gged$oqi@felix.seas.gwu.edu> <53hnn3$474@news.nyu.edu> organization: New York University newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1996-10-11T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Robert Eachus says " You can blame Ma Bell for the name octothorpe, but the symbol # for pounds goes way back. I'm not sure if I could dig up a printed reference before 1700, but I am certain I can find one that predates the telegraph by at least a century. (Actually the Williams College Library is a great place to look if you are still in Pownal, Robert. Just ask for early arithmetic textbooks.)" Can we please have such a reference, instead of declarations that you are sure it exists. note that we still, surprisingly, do not have any shred of evidence to support the claims that the symbol # for pound goes way back. It sounds reasonable, but it would be nice if someone could come up with one quote that would settle the issue.