Linux HTML mail agent with RTL and LTR paragraph explicit support

[Shachar Shemesh]

On 06/25/2012 01:42 PM, Dotan Cohen wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 8:06 AM, Shachar Shemesh <shachar at shemesh.biz> wrote:
>> I disagree completely. The embedding control characters are designed for,
>> well, embedding.
> Correct.
Good. But
>  As plain text has no concept of a paragraph,
Well, that really depends on what you mean by "plain text". RLE/PDF are
defined by the UBA (Unicode BiDi Algorithm), and it, clearly, does have
a concept of a paragraph.
>  using \n, \n\n,
> \r\n, \r\n\r\n, or any other convention for a paragraph is arbitrary.
Technically true, but both irrelevant and misleading. Misleading because
the choice of \n or \r\n was arbitrary, but is now standard. Irrelevant
because we are talking about the UBA, not "plain text" (whatever that
means).
> So if any arbitrary part of the text is to be RTL (no matter if the
> user calls it a paragraph or not) then it is to be marked as an
> embedded RTL section.
This is incorrect. It does not matter much what the user calls a
paragraph, but if the /text editor/ calls a certain run a paragraph,
then that is the case.

You make it sound as if, in the sequence "something <RLE> more something
\n even more <PDF>", the third part, saying " even more" will have an
RTL level. That will simply not be the case with any UBA conforming text
editor, as UBA specifically says that any embedding levels are reset
when the paragraph is terminated. This is because the embedding controls
are *embedded* in the paragraph.

In other words, a paragraph is a paragraph, with BiDi direction, and
embedding is embedding. The two are not the same.

Shachar

-- 
Shachar Shemesh
Lingnu Open Source Consulting Ltd.
http://www.lingnu.com

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/pipermail/linux-il/attachments/20120625/9f4638b2/attachment.html>