On Mon, 4 Feb 2002, John Cowan wrote:
> Gaspar Sinai scripsit:
> > Now the exact same file is viewed with two different viewers
> > at the bottom of this page:
> >
> > http://www.yudit.org/security/
>
> Outlook Express, at least the version you are using, has a bug;
> it is failing to set the overall directionality to RTL even
> though the first character is strongly RTL. The fact that
> some implementations are buggy is hardly an argument against
> either the use of bidi or Unicode.
I am sorry but someone on this list has just said:
+----------------------------------------------------
|The bidi algorithm is anything but vague. Any
|implementation can be rigorously tested against two
|reference implementations, to ensure fully compatible
|implementation.
+----------------------------------------------------
So does this mean that Microsoft does not rigorously
test their products? Or does this mean the test is
wrong? Or maybe the algorithm is vague?
I expect at least one yes answer here.
Come on guys this is only *one* example. And it
happened in MS outlook too. (No more screenshots please
none of my friends use that product any more).
I am ready to publish regularily bad rendering of
the *buggy* implementations of the non-vague unicode
BIDI (or the non-buggy implementations of the *vague*
BIDI - take your choice).
I wonder which cost more to regualrily patch and
change products or to change the standard and use
a reversable bidi.
It may take some time to find the bug - but the bug
will be there...
Cheers
gaspar
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Mon Feb 04 2002 - 08:02:47 EST