Re: [BULK] - Re: Vertical BIDI

From: Mark Davis (mark.davis@jtcsv.com)
Date: Fri May 28 2004 - 11:02:45 CDT

  • Next message: Mark E. Shoulson: "Re: Response to Everson Phoen and why June 7? (Chris Fynn...)"

    Yes, currently if someone wanted to set Ogham so that it would flow from
    bottom-to-top if vertical and left-right if horizontal, they would need to
    change the controls depending on the flow. So documents using Ogham would need
    some manual effort to change the flow between vertical and horizontal.

    As with directionality and layout for Boustrophedon, Rongorongo, Lewis Carroll's
    "The Mouse's Tale", ad-copy layout, etc., the UTC has yet not concluded that the
    number of plaintext documents concerned would be worth the considerable cost and
    effort of changing all the implementations that use the BIDI algorithm. It has
    instead left that for higher-level protocols. But if there is evidence of such a
    significant population of active users that would find such manual effort so
    onerous that it is worth this change, then a proposal could be formulated and
    presented to the committee.

    Mark
    __________________________________
    http://www.macchiato.com
    ► शिष्यादिच्छेत्पराजयम् ◄

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Dominikus Scherkl (MGW)" <DominikusScherkl@mgw-online.de>
    To: <unicode@unicode.org>
    Sent: Fri, 2004 May 28 07:50
    Subject: Re: [BULK] - Re: Vertical BIDI

    > > > As things now stand, Ogham must be wrapped in RLO...PDF brackets when
    > > > mixed with vertical Han or Mongolian.
    > >
    > > Yes, that's true -- and I don't see any reason why people can't live with
    > > that... Those are the kinds of reasons we have the explicit controls.
    >
    > But the Problem was: wraped with RLO...PDF ogham is rendered wrong
    > in horizontal text and without it is rendered wrong in vertical text - so one
    > needs to change the explicit directionality when changing from horizontal
    > to vertical and vice versa, but most other combinations of languages do not.
    > That is unsatisfactoring. This was the only reason (as far as I can see) to
    > propose a LR_BT value for the direction.
    >
    > --
    > Dominikus Scherkl
    >
    >
    >
    >

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri May 28 2004 - 11:03:53 CDT