[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [emacs-bidi] improve visual-to-logical
From: |
Alex Schroeder |
Subject: |
Re: [emacs-bidi] improve visual-to-logical |
Date: |
Tue, 13 Nov 2001 18:27:09 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.090004 (Oort Gnus v0.04) Emacs/21.1 (i686-pc-linux-gnu) |
"Eli Zaretskii" <address@hidden> writes:
> There are two types of Hebrew characters in Emacs 21: those which
> belong to the hebrew-iso8859-8 charset, and those which belong to the
> mule-unicode-0100-24ff charset. My point is that you should use with
> each one of these the LRM and RLM that belong to the same charset.
I understand. But the nature of Ehud's idea applies to any script --
Arabic, for example. Thus, the question is not wether to choose LRM
from hebrew-iso8859-8 or from mule-unicode-0100-24ff, but any of the
potentially numerous LRM's around (perhaps only two, who knows...).
Anyway, I think that I should use the most general one (Unicode) and
rely on unification (Dave Love's effort).
Perhaps we should define the problem again: Ehud's idea requires the
insertion of LRM characters. When saving such a file, it would be
very annoying if Emacs complained about unsave coding systems just
because a LRM character from another charset was used.
There are two solutions to this: Pick a "safe" LRM character, or rely
on unification.
I prefer the second approach because I think unification will happen
anyway -- especially since Hebrew and Arabic are in 8859 so the work
might already be done for those charsets. Additionally, I don't know
how to pick a "safe" LRM character. This would involve the same
machinery used when deciding wether the current coding system is safe
when writing the file. I don't think it should be necessary to invoke
that machinery just to decided which LRM to use.
Alex.
--
http://www.emacswiki.org/
- Re: [emacs-bidi] bidi categories, derived from Unicode data, (continued)
- Re: [emacs-bidi] bidi categories, Ehud Karni, 2001/11/10
- Re: [emacs-bidi] bidi categories, Alex Schroeder, 2001/11/10
- Re: [emacs-bidi] bidi categories, Ehud Karni, 2001/11/12
- [emacs-bidi] improve visual-to-logical, Alex Schroeder, 2001/11/13
- Re: [emacs-bidi] improve visual-to-logical, Eli Zaretskii, 2001/11/13
- Re: [emacs-bidi] improve visual-to-logical, Alex Schroeder, 2001/11/13
- Re: [emacs-bidi] improve visual-to-logical, Eli Zaretskii, 2001/11/13
- Re: [emacs-bidi] improve visual-to-logical,
Alex Schroeder <=
- Re: [emacs-bidi] improve visual-to-logical, Eli Zaretskii, 2001/11/13
- Re: [emacs-bidi] improve visual-to-logical, Ehud Karni, 2001/11/13
- Re: [emacs-bidi] improve visual-to-logical, Eli Zaretskii, 2001/11/13
- Re: [emacs-bidi] bidi categories, Alex Schroeder, 2001/11/13
- Re: [emacs-bidi] bidi categories, Ehud Karni, 2001/11/13
- Re: [emacs-bidi] adding LRM in visual-to-logical transform, Alex Schroeder, 2001/11/15
- Re: [emacs-bidi] adding LRM in visual-to-logical transform, Alex Schroeder, 2001/11/16
- Re: [emacs-bidi] adding LRM in visual-to-logical transform, Eli Zaretskii, 2001/11/16
- Re: [emacs-bidi] adding LRM in visual-to-logical transform, Eli Zaretskii, 2001/11/16
- Re: [emacs-bidi] adding LRM in visual-to-logical transform, Alex Schroeder, 2001/11/17