Hi,
I wanted to point out once more that the "pretty good" algorithm means that
it is fast but not conformant to the Unicode BiDi algorithm. It
approximates it, but gets some things wrong, and Mark has not implemented
explicit codes so far.
Also, the location for the IBM Classes for Unicode (ICU) should be given as
http://oss.software.ibm.com/developerworks/opensource/icu/ rather than the
alphaworks server that we used to use.
Curious only that some of the results from the "Unicode Reference Code" do
not match the ICU results, which were cross-checked with the Java reference
implementation that is now part of the standard and is going to go onto the
CD. We will look into this, or maybe someone else (Mark? Asmus?) can look
at it, too.
markus
Mark Leisher <mleisher@crl.nmsu.edu> on 99-12-06 13:40:07
To: "Unicode List" <unicode@unicode.org>
cc: i18n@xfree86.org, linux-utf8@nl.linux.org, perl-unicode@perl.org
Subject: Bidi reordering results - final
The comparison table of implicit bidirectional reordering behavior for
Unicode
text has another entry. I finally discovered what I was doing wrong with
the
ICU test code I wrote.
http://crl.nmsu.edu/~mleisher/ucdata.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Leisher
Computing Research Lab I have never made but one prayer to God,
New Mexico State University a very short one:
Box 30001, Dept. 3CRL "Oh Lord, make my enemies
ridiculous."
Las Cruces, NM 88003 And God granted it. -- Voltaire, letter
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:56 EDT