[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [emacs-bidi] Treatment of LRE,RLE,LRO,RLO,PDF,LRM,RLM

From: Kenichi Handa
Subject: Re: [emacs-bidi] Treatment of LRE,RLE,LRO,RLO,PDF,LRM,RLM
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2010 21:29:43 +0900

Sorry for the late response on this matter.

In article <address@hidden>, Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> writes:

> > From: Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden>
> > Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 07:26:15 -0500
> > Cc: address@hidden
> > 
> > By the way, one other issue is that display tables take precedence
> > over glyphless-char-display, in the sense that characters for which
> > there are non-trivial entries in the current display table are
> > displayed using the display table, disregarding any
> > glyphless-char-display-control settings.  If this is what we want, we
> > should probably document that.

IF that is what we want, we surely should document that.
But, as I wrote before, I'm still hesitating over which is
better; keeping glyphless-char-display separate from display
table, or integrating that functionality to display table.

> And another issue: the character group c0-control includes the
> newline.  So if the display of this group is set to anything at all,
> the newlines are not displayed as such.  I doubt that users would
> expect or want that when they customize the display of c0-control.  So
> maybe we should exempt newline (and perhaps also TAB) from this group;
> users who really want that can always set glyphless-char-display
> directly.


I agree on exempting TAB and NL from c0-control group.

Kenichi Handa

reply via email to

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