From: Peter Constable (petercon@microsoft.com)
Date: Wed Mar 24 2004 - 16:43:17 EST
> From: unicode-bounce@unicode.org [mailto:unicode-bounce@unicode.org]
On Behalf
> Of Kenneth Whistler
> By the way, while Peter Constable noted that
>
> "the interaction of a boustrophedon with bidi is a valid issue."
>
> I would contend that that is at the higher level where bidi
> interacts with the line layout mechanism that determines the
> directional context, rather than inside the bidi algorithm itself...
I was simply suggesting that there may be issues there to consider, but
not necessarily implying that the bidi algorithm needed to address in
any way interactions between boustrophedon and non-boustrophedon text. I
*could not possibly* suggest that until I had some idea of what the
expected behaviour should be. I'm not aware of there being any
conventionally-defined behaviour for interaction between strong LTR or
RTL text and boustrophedon text. The requirements have to be defined
before a solution can be architected. And as you go on to point out...
> Besides, this is really a very, very marginal concern. All real world
> exemplars of boustrophedon are *not* bidirectional text, and all
> real world exemplars of bidirectional text are not laid out in
> boustrophedon. Why? Well, because it would be a stupid thing to
> do and give readers and writers headaches.
it's not obvious that requirements do exist.
Peter
Peter Constable
Globalization Infrastructure and Font Technologies
Microsoft Windows Division
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Mar 24 2004 - 17:22:35 EST