Why do three of the seven zeroes on that page not have those weird lead-ins? (Left axis, and both date fields each have non-cursive zeroes)
The other two non-controversial zeros are each after a “5”. The horizontal stroke of the 5 extends to the top of the zero.
Coming to the controversial ones, why do we expect them not to look like the zeroes in the axis or date fields? Why are we expecting them to be “cursive” with so many examples of non-cursive zeroes present? Why are we thinking there isn’t the horizontal stroke of a minus sign in front of them?
“cursive zeros” are only this annoying when they’re the first number in the sequence. I don’t know this doctor, so this person could have meant negatives.
I’ve never actually seen a positive cylinder correction on a script, and I just read this page which suggests that pretty much every cylinder correction will be written as a negative number.
You missed the negative signs on the cylinder corrections.
Not negatives. They’re “cursive zeros”. My old doctor used to do that. Annoying as hell.
Why do three of the seven zeroes on that page not have those weird lead-ins? (Left axis, and both date fields each have non-cursive zeroes)
The other two non-controversial zeros are each after a “5”. The horizontal stroke of the 5 extends to the top of the zero.
Coming to the controversial ones, why do we expect them not to look like the zeroes in the axis or date fields? Why are we expecting them to be “cursive” with so many examples of non-cursive zeroes present? Why are we thinking there isn’t the horizontal stroke of a minus sign in front of them?
“cursive zeros” are only this annoying when they’re the first number in the sequence. I don’t know this doctor, so this person could have meant negatives.
I’ve never actually seen a positive cylinder correction on a script, and I just read this page which suggests that pretty much every cylinder correction will be written as a negative number.
That’s interesting and not at all comforting lol… I have a positive cylinder on both eyes.