[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [emacs-bidi] status? news?

From: Eli Zaretskii
Subject: Re: [emacs-bidi] status? news?
Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2001 09:10:01 +0200

> Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 22:50:26 +0330 (IRT)
> From: Roozbeh Pournader <address@hidden>
> > Why does it have to be neutral?  Why isn't it treated as weak instead?
> Compatiblity with legacy data is the most probable reason.

I doubt that back-compatibility was high on Microsoft's agenda when
they designed this.  Each new version of Word is incompatible with
previous versions, precisely because of changes in the Hebrew

> But what do you mean by weak? Like numbers? Or introducing more and
> more types?

I meant numbers, yes.  But if that somehow doesn't cut it, then I
don't see any disaster in defining a new type.  I suspect more
characters which are now neutral will need to be moved into this
category, to DTRT.  Perhaps Ehud could post his classification of
characters from his package, just to show what needs to be done to
make the display look right, even for a language as simple as Hebrew.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]