On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 5:07 AM, Kenichi Handa <address@hidden>
Thank yor for testing them.
In article <AANLkTinFrEnuW=oPeBqg6=address@hidden
>, Amit Aronovitch <address@hidden
> 1) I confirm that Arabic shaping seems to work fine on my build (27/8/10
> rev. 101200, on Linux+X (Debian unstable)).
> 2) Logical movement with C-f/C-b in the hello file seems fine (I do not see
> the trap described above).
> (keyboards etc.) - I noticed the following points, but I am not sure what i=
> 3) My Arabic is very basic, and I am not familiar with Arabic computing
> the expected behavior (I can only compare to other programs - gedit in this> m17n-lib's invisible markup consume column numbers). For example as you mov=
> a) Column numbers (column-number-mode) behave strangely (I suspect that
> using C-f in the word "=D9=87=D8=B0=D8=A7" column numbers go through "0,1,4=
> ,5" (i.e. the
> second character takes up 3 columns). If I change that to "=D8=A8=D9=87=D8=
> =B0=D8=A7", the column
> positions are "0,1,4,6,7" (the second and third chars take up 3 and 2I've just committed a fix for this bug. It's not related to
> columns resp.?).
> In gedit column positions are 1 character per column and do not depend on
> the shaping.
Thanks. Much better now :-)
I also checked the diacritics (tashkil): It seems that they do not take up column number in Emacs.
In gedit, cursor movement is similar, but the vowels there do take up column number (as for cursor movement, as in emacs: forwards/backwards skips them, while 'delete' handles them separately). I find this behavior more consistent with the way both programs handle the lam-alef ligature (one cursor-movement space, but two column numbers).
However, as I said, I do not know which behavior is the most natural for Arabic users.