Mistake in Annotations Conventions Document?

[Eric]

Hello,

I was looking at the annotations conventions document (https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vQEyIFTUjh_zyighP8f8XDQCfgam9mTA0zkY9qWd4gngAnWmgwFkdCdSfB6rTfi_jtsqM2NdUjE9vDb/pub#h.fqn7c3m6m7m4) -- specifically section 4.2.17 on annotating numbers. I saw an example on that document that I think should have been annotated as "TWO ZERO TWELVE" rather than "TWO TWELVE". (See attached screenshot.) I'm new to the SLAASh annotation conventions, and I would like to confirm whether my initial assumption is correct.

Thanks,
Eric

[Julie A. Hochgesang]

Hello Eric!

It depends on how you actually perceive the production. In my head when signing the series of numbers and perceiving that series when I put together the photos, I only saw the number "two" and then "twelve" (the "zero" you perceived, I saw as a transition between the two numbers). So for me there's no error in this description. But do go by what you actually see in production. Hope that helps. 

- Julie