What is the difference between the proposed LRI and RLI with,
respectively, <FSI,LRE> and <FSI,RLE> ?
Why do we need LRI and RLI as well, when FSI should be enough for all
isolates (for which there's no good reason to force the direction of
their embedded texts when FSI/PDI is exactly needed because we don't
want to know the direction of the outer text and the direction of the
inner text, but just want to create a simple and effective embedding,
where LRE and RLE would even not been needed at all, and even
deprecated, alorg with PDF) ?
The CSS equivalent for the FSI/PDI would be a single property
"unicode-bidi:isolate" and nothing more (other values of
"unicode-bidi:" would be deprecated as well, except possibly LRO/RLO
for locally changing the mirroring of a single character, in which
case we would embed it between <FSI,RLO> and <PDI>, because there's no
other way to mirror a character withjout changing its direction or
changing the direction of the text after it, and in HTML we would
typically use <bdo style="unicode-bidi:isolate" dir="rtl">..</bdo> or
some newer semantic element like <bdi dir="rtl">...</bdi>).
2013/1/16 Roozbeh Pournader <roozbeh_at_google.com>:
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 4:38 PM, Jukka K. Korpela <jkorpela_at_cs.tut.fi>
> wrote:
>>
>> Code points 2066, 2067, and 2068 are unassigned.
>
>
> Not anymore. See the pipeline and the latest proposed update of UAX#9:
> http://www.unicode.org/alloc/Pipeline.html
> http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr9/proposed.html
Received on Tue Jan 15 2013 - 19:35:27 CST
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Tue Jan 15 2013 - 19:35:27 CST