Re: Popular wordprocessors treating U+00A0 as fixed-width

I do not call them by names, what I call is their reply, even when people
explain them, and when they even suggest something else which is obviously
wrong (and in fact absolutely not needed in Office which offers another way
using styles for controling linebreaks without having to change the encoded
character (a Word document has never been plain text, so I wonder why they
even speak about compatibility by breaking another compatibility rule as a
pseudo-workaround).

2018-01-01 9:06 GMT+01:00 Jonathan Rosenne via Unicode <unicode_at_unicode.org>
:

> May we all please keep this discussion civil. People, being human, may
> sometimes make mistakes, but that does not necessarily justify calling them
> names.
>
>
>
> Best Regards,
>
>
>
> Jonathan Rosenne
>
>
>
> *From:* Unicode [mailto:unicode-bounces_at_unicode.org] *On Behalf Of *Philippe
> Verdy via Unicode
> *Sent:* Monday, January 01, 2018 5:43 AM
> *To:* Shriramana Sharma
> *Cc:* UnicoDe List
> *Subject:* Re: Popular wordprocessors treating U+00A0 as fixed-width
>
>
>
> Well it's unfortunate that Microsoft's own response (by its MSVP) is
> completely wrong, suggesting to use Narrow non-breaking space to get
> justification, which is exactly the reverse where these NNBSP should NOT be
> justified and keep their width.
>
>
>
> Microsoft's developers have absolutely misunderstood the standard where
> both SPACE and NBSP should really behave the same for justification (being
> different only for the existence of the break opportunity).
>
>
>
> This Microsoft response is completrrely supid, and it even breaks the
> classic typography for French use of NNBSP ("fine" in French) around some
> punctuations (before :;!?» or after «) and as group separators in numbers
> (note that NNBSP was introduced in Unicode very late in the standard (and
> before that NBSP was used only because this was the only non-breaking space
> available but it was much too large!)
>
>
>
> Still many documents use NBSP instead of NNBSP around punctuations or as
> group separators (but in Word these contextual occurences of NBSP which are
> easy to detect, could have been autoreplaced when typesetting, or proposed
> as a correction in the integrated speller, at least for French). But the
> old behavior of old versions of Office (before NNBSP existed in Unicode)
> should have been cleaned up since long.
>
>
>
> It's clear that MS Office developers don't know the standards and do what
> they want (they also don't know the correct standards for maths in Excel
> and use a lot of very stupid assumptions, as if they were smarter than
> their users that suffer since long from these bugs !) and don't want to fix
> their past errors.
>
>
>
> 2018-01-01 3:14 GMT+01:00 Shriramana Sharma via Unicode <
> unicode_at_unicode.org>:
>
> While http://unicode.org/reports/tr14/ clearly states that:
>
> <quote>
> When expanding or compressing interword space according to common
> typographical practice, only the spaces marked by U+0020 SPACE and
> U+00A0 NO-BREAK SPACE are subject to compression, and only spaces
> marked by U+0020 SPACE, U+00A0 NO-BREAK SPACE, and occasionally spaces
> marked by U+2009 THIN SPACE are subject to expansion. All other space
> characters normally have fixed width.
> </quote>
>
> … really sad to see the misunderstanding around U+00A0:
>
> https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/msoffice/forum/msoffice_
> word-mso_windows8-mso_2016/nonbreakable-space-justification-in-word-2016/
> 4fa1ad30-004c-454f-9775-a3beaa91c88b?auth=1
>
> https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=41652
>
> --
> Shriramana Sharma ஶ்ரீரமணஶர்மா श्रीरमणशर्मा 𑀰𑁆𑀭𑀻𑀭𑀫𑀡𑀰𑀭𑁆𑀫𑀸
>
>
>
Received on Mon Jan 01 2018 - 04:33:36 CST