If you really want to keep it concise you can write it as base-12 numbers.
C1 C1# D1 D1# E1 F1 F1# G1 G1# A1 A1# B1 C2 C2# D2 D2# E2 F2 F2# G2 G2# A2 A2# B2 ...
00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 0a 0b 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 1a 1b ...
First number is octave. Second number is half-tone in that octave. Translating is just mechanical addition.EDIT: on second thought making it base-12 just to save some space makes no sense, people are good with base-10, just keep the numbers.
Scales have 7 notes, not 12. A musician plays music in a scale, they aren't a computer outputting pitches, they are a person playing notes. Music notation has a reason to be this way: notes in the scale don't have flats or sharps next to them, accidentals do. Reducing everything to a number describing absolute pitches is the right thing to do for a computer to play (see midi). It's not the way to go for a person that actually has to understand the logic and patterns in the music.
The point ajuc is making is that the flat-sharp accidentals aren't used or needed at all if you just assign numbers to each tone. There's no concept of flat or sharp, unless you want to deal with microtones.
Thinking about it, the traditional notation is just mapping to an octal system, with the key accidentals acting as modifiers to the map and the base-8 values being displayed graphically as vertical position on the staff.