From: fantasai (fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net)
Date: Fri May 14 2004 - 23:15:12 CDT
Ernest Cline wrote:
>
> Only because of the way that Unicode handles vertical scripts by
> assigning them a LTR direction and leaving it up to higher
> levels to make the perpendicular flip. If someone wanted to include
> a vertical snippet of Ogham in a top to bottom script, they might
> desire to have the Ogham go from bottom to top, and that would
> make RTL Ogham reasonable in that context.
This is a shortcoming in Unicode BIDI: it currently only represents
horizontal directionality, not vertical directionality. As far as I
am aware, Ogham should never go right-to-left on a horizontal line,
and forcing it to be RTL just to accomodate a particular vertical
presentation would be wrong. (Take away the "vertical text" directive,
and the line becomes rtl horizontal.)
> It is a pedantic edge case that ought to be considered once
> raised (as it has been) even though I wouldn't recommend
> actively seeking out other such edge cases. :)
There are other, more common cases that would require Unicode to
consider vertical directionality. Correct handling of Ogham would
follow from that naturally.
~fantasai
-- http://fantasai.inkedblade.net/contact
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri May 14 2004 - 23:18:28 CDT