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

Re: Unicode and Bidi vs Shaping



On Sat, Mar 01, 2003 at 05:31:23PM +0330, Roozbeh Pournader wrote:
> 
> As promised, attached is our proposal to the Unicode Technical Committee
> about Bidi and Shaping interaction, that we sent last night for
> consideration in the UTC meeting due to be started on March 4. Also
> attached is a discussion paper from Mark Davis, the president of Unicode
> Consortium and the author of Unicode Bidirectional Algorithm.
> 
> Please send any comments to me, Behdad, and/or this mailing list.


I wish I could have commented on this much earlier, but due to short notice
and daily life business this may be a little too late. However, my comments
are more of questions to elaborate than discussion types.

1. When you say:
   "We will override the first two characters to be LTR....
    the next two will be embedded, but with the normal RTL direction"

I am a bit confused. So let me re-iterate some of the concepts here. In
the first table:

Codes
----------------
LRM/RLM
LRO JEEM AIN PDF
RLO LAM MEEM PDF

The code LRM (Left-Right Mark, which is a weak zero-width character) simply 
says this text is left-to-right. So after the mark we have characters which 
would normally act as those marks (but in the case of Arabic letters they 
would act as RLM codes). Then you have LRO (explicit Left-to-right override)
forcing JEEM and AIN to be treated as left-to-right. Again you have LRO
but for LAM and MEEM.. these are embedded in the LRM?


2. I have tried to view the examples under Mozilla and under IE (both look
   very different). I am referring to the first table's last three rows.

3. I don't know if it's just me, but to my eyes, it looks as if example B is
   the most acceptable (and "less weird" than C).

4. Perhaps #3 is because the given example is not a real word (at least not
   an Arabic word I know) and so I found it difficult to relate to the given
   examples. It would be much nicer if a real-life example is given as opposed
   to a hypothetical one. This would emphasise the situation, wouldn't you
   agree?


Thanks
---
-------------------------------------------------------
| Mohammed Elzubeir    | Visit us at:                 |
|                      |  http://www.arabeyes.org/    |
| Arabeyes Project     | Homepage:                    |
| Unix the 'right' way |  http://fakkir.net/~elzubeir/|
-------------------------------------------------------
---
Was I helpful? Let others know:
http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=elzubeir

Attachment: pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature