Re: bidi text printing

[Nadim Shaikli <shaikli at yahoo dot com>]

--- Behdad Esfahbod <behdad at cs dot toronto dot edu> wrote:
> >As discussed on IRC, it is best to get proper support within
> >the application itself (it ensures longevity in the support
> >among many other things).  Newbies for one will not seek out
> >"alternate" solutions (nor will non-hackers and business-type
> >users) so it would be best to have it supported from the get-go
> >natively within the popular applications.
> 
> Wrong, Wrong, Wrong, in many many many ways:

No seriously, how do you feel about the comments :-)  Shesh...
I see a future in politics for you (being subtle and all ;-)

>   * Yes, it is best to get proper support in the application
> itself, but "really proper", not just something that does the
> job.

All I'm saying is that I would be in favor of proper support
within the application instead of outside of it via pipes,
hooks and anchors.

>   * Newbies *do* seek for alternative solutions.  They search on
> Google.  Since they **don't know** about the Unix traditions.
> They don't know that some command named "lpr" exists at all.

Not the new bread of users (keep in mind that linux is trying to
make it on the desktop strictly based on its GUI strengths).  And
in passing no one on this list (newbies and otherwise) was aware
of this "work-around" which further notes to me that it would be
best to have this support in the application.

>   * Business-type users *do* seek for alternative solutions too.
> What can they do otherwise??

I'm saying we need to make it easy for people in order to expect
them to use something.  People should not go hunt for potential
solutions and hacks.

>   * For both newbies and business-type users, you better add
> printing support in desktops.  Have you ever tried printing
> Arabic with gedit?  What about Mozilla??  AbiWord???

That goes without saying.  I also believe in adding it in the
more fundamental applications that _I_ use more often than the
ones you list above.

>   * Newbies *are not supposed to* use command line tools.  Eh?
> At least without asking others for advice.

Hehehe - yeah, right.

> > > > I'm new to linux (so go easy on me) and I can't understand
> > > > the need for such a primitive application like 'lp' needing
> > > > to address international issues, if it can be done by using
> > > > a higher level format...
> > >
> > >There will always be demand for lp/lpr (and look into something
> > >called 'enscript') since the command-line and the terminal
> > >emulator will never disappear.
> 
> So yes, there will always be demand for lpr, but what does it
> mean???  lpr is used by every command that wants print.  Where do
> you deduce that people are supposed to call lpr on command line
> manually???

Personal experience (and I always speak for myself and no one else)
has me thinking that others might do similar things to what I do and
I use lp/lpr ALOT.

> Last, but not least, don't forget the Unix philosophy:  Every
> tool should do a small job, but do it good.  Pipes are your
> friend.

--- ahmad khalifa <ahmadkhalifa at hotmail dot com> wrote:
> 
> YES, YES, YES.... :))
> he3he3he3...
> 
> 2 keywords i liked very much, "Pipes", "Desktops"....

I think I've said all I want on this topic (ie. "I believe all
fundamental applications command-line and otherwise should
include native Arabic support with the option to disable it
for any possible fringe scenarios").

Ahmad, you don't need to work on this topic if you see no use
for it !!

Salam.

 - Nadim


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - More reliable, more storage, less spam
http://mail.yahoo.com