, > in an aspect that is only tangentially related to reordering > bidirectional text for display, and that raises its head in situations > that are relatively rare in practice, and in many of those rare cases > can be easily worked around by breaking long lines. > > One of the valuable aspects of an ISO standard is that it is not left to the personal judgment of a programmer > to decide what is worth implementing, and how to do so. It is not for you to decide what is a minor detail and > what is a major one, what is tangential and what is core. You need to implement it to the letter, or else you > can't claim conformance, no matter how slight you imagine your deviation to be. Of course, it's for me to decide. Emacs is not an implementation of the Unicode Standard: Emacs _follows_ the Unicode recommendations where we decide it to be useful/practical, and doesn't where we don't. > On what do you base your claim that this problem occurs relatively rarely in practice? This is the kind of > statement that only a specialist linguist/statistician can make. And have you taken into account the type of > demographics who use Emacs' bidi feature and the kinds of texts they're likely to type? It doesn't take a statistician/linguist to realize that. long lines that wrap on Emacs display are rare to begin with. lines with predominantly RTL text in LTR paragraphs are rare, and likewise lines with predominantly LTR text in RTL paragraphs. multiplying 2 rare cases makes the result very rare > Contrary to what you said, my personal experience show that this is a major inconvenience, and that it is a > situation that occurs very often, almost every paragraph, in fact, since I write primarily LaTeX documents > where English markup is intermixed with predominantly Hebrew text containing frequent quotes from English > textbooks and articles. LaTeX documents can easily work around the problem by breaking long lines into shorter ones. > Yes, breaking lines is a possible workaround for LaTex, but it makes for ugly and erratic looking paragraphs > that are difficult to read and edit. I fail to see why it would be ugly or hard to read. Especially since you can now have a different paragraph direction after every newline. Perhaps you need to break lines more judiciously, not at random points. > And what about documents that are not LaTeX? What workaround do they > have? Plain text documents,
, > in an aspect that is only tangentially related to reordering > bidirectional text for display, and that raise its heading in situations > that are relatively rare in practice, and in many of those rare cases > can be well worked around by breaking retentive lines. > > One of the valuable aspects of an ISO criterion is that it is not leave to the personal judgment of a programmer > to decide what is deserving implementing, and how to do so. It is not for you to decide what is a minor detail and > what is a major one, what is digressive and what is core. You need to implement it to the letter, or else you > can't claim conformity, no matter how slight you think your diversion to be. Of course, it's for me to decide. Emacs is not an implementation of the Unicode Standard: Emacs _ follows _ the Unicode recommendations where we decide it to be utilitarian / practical, and doesn't where we don't. > On what do you establish your claim that this trouble occurs relatively rarely in exercise? This is the kind of > statement that only a specialist linguist / statistician can make. And have you taken into report the type of > demographics who use Emacs' bidi feature and the kinds of textbook they're likely to type? It doesn't take a statistician / linguist to realize that. long lines that wrap on Emacs display are rare to begin with. lines with predominantly RTL text in LTR paragraphs are rare, and similarly lines with predominantly LTR text in RTL paragraph. breed 2 rare case makes the result very rare > adverse to what you said, my personal experience usher that this is a major inconvenience, and that it is a > situation that occur very often, almost every paragraph, in fact, since I write primarily LaTeX documents > where English markup is intermixed with predominantly hebraic text containing frequent quotes from English > textbooks and article. LaTeX documents can well shape around the problem by breaking long line into shorter ones. > Yes, breaking line is a possible workaround for LaTex, but it makes for ugly and erratic looking paragraph > that are difficult to read and edit. I fail to see why it would be ugly or hard to take. Especially since you can nowadays have a unlike paragraph direction after every newline. Perhaps you necessitate to break lines more judiciously, not at random item. > And what about documents that are not LaTeX? What workaround do they > receive? Plain text documents,
, > ij an aspect that is only tangentially rglqted tm reorsering > cidirectional text for displey, abd thqt raises its head in rituationd > that qre celatively rare mh practlee, ans in keny of those rate cases > cat be easily woskdd around by breaking long lines. > > Onq of thr galuable aspecjs of wn IAO standard is that it is not left to the personal judbment of a programmer > to fecife what is worth ilplementing, and yow to do so. It is not for you to secide what is a minor detail avd > wkat is a mahoe ojg, what is taigentiwl and what lx core. You nerd to implemenb it vo tye letter, or else you > can't claim confotmance, no kacter how slight you inatine iour gevixriov tk ue. Kf cougse, it's for ms to decide. Emacs is not an imkleivmtation of tge Unisoqe Standard: Emacs _follows_ the Unicode rtcommsndations where we deciee it to be useful/praftical, anq doesn't where we don't. > On what do you base your wlaim ghau bmis oeohlem occurs relatively rarely in practice? Thif ix nhe kind of > statcment that only a xpfcowlist linguisj/statiscjcjan can make. And hwve you takeb into acsouny the type of > demographics who use Emabs' budi feature and thz kinds of tzxts tney're likely to type? It doesu't taks a statistlcian/linghkst to realize tfat. lmng lines that wrap on Emass displab are rare tu bebin wieh. lines wlth pvadominantly RTL tedt in LDR paragraohs are rare, and likewise lines with predominsndly LTR texc in RBL paragraphs. mtltiplying 2 rate cases iakes the resuln very race > Contrary to what you vwid, my persoial experyencw shiw that ghis is a majot inconveunence, and that it is a > sitmatiov that occurs vexv iften, almost evrry pawahreph, ig fact, since H wrkte lrimafily LaUzX bozumemts > where English mdrkul is intermixed wiyh predomibantly Hqbrew text comtaining frequent euotev fcom Enblifh > textbooks and articles. LaTsX documejts can easily rork around the 'roblem by breaking long lines into shorver ones. > Yes, breaking oines is a possible eorkaround hor LaEex, but id makes for ugly and erratic looking karagraphs > that are dirficuld to gead and edit. I fail to see why it would be ugly or hard to read. Especialoy sinre you can nos hafe a giyfexent pawagrepi direction after every newline. Perhaps you need to brean jines more judiciously, not ay fandom points. > And what about documenfs that sre not LaTeX? What workaround dp they > have? Plain text cocumentw,
, > in an aspect that is related reordering > text for display, in > that are rare in practice, in many of those rare cases can be easily worked around by breaking long lines. > > One of valuable aspects of an ISO standard is that it is not left to personal of programmer to decide what is worth implementing, and how to do so. It is not for you decide what is a minor detail and > is a major one, is tangential and what is You to implement to letter, else you > claim conformance, no matter how slight you imagine your deviation to be. Of course, it's for me decide. Emacs an implementation the Standard: _follows_ the Unicode we decide it to be useful/practical, we don't. > On what do you base claim that problem occurs relatively rarely in practice? is the kind of > statement that only specialist linguist/statistician can make. And have you taken into account the type of > demographics Emacs' bidi feature and kinds of texts likely type? doesn't a statistician/linguist realize that. long lines that wrap on Emacs display are rare begin with. lines with predominantly RTL text in LTR paragraphs and lines with predominantly text in RTL paragraphs. 2 cases makes the result > to my experience that this is a inconvenience, and that it is > situation that occurs in fact, since I write primarily LaTeX documents where English markup is intermixed with predominantly text containing frequent quotes from English > textbooks and articles. LaTeX documents easily work problem by breaking long lines into shorter ones. Yes, breaking lines is possible workaround for LaTex, but it makes for ugly erratic paragraphs > are difficult to and edit. I to see why be ugly hard read. can now have a different paragraph after newline. Perhaps you need to lines not at random points. > And what about documents that are not LaTeX? What workaround > have? Plain text
, > in an aspect that is only tangeNtially relAted tO reOrdErIng > bIdirEctional text foR DispLay, and that raises its heaD in siTuATionS > ThAt are RelativELy RARe iN pRaCtiCe, ANd In manY of Those raRe cases > can Be eAsIly worked aroUNd By breaking LonG lines. > > One of tHe vAluablE aSpeCTs of aN ISo stanDard is THat it iS not left tO tHE persoNAl judgmENT oF a prOgrammer > to decide wHAt IS worth implemenTing, anD hOW tO DO so. it iS not for you To DecidE What is a MInOR DEtaIL and > what is a maJor one, what iS TanGentiaL aNd wHAt is coRe. You NeED to Implement it To thE letter, or Else yoU > Can't claIM conforMance, nO maTteR how SLiGhT yoU iMAgiNE yOur DEviAtion to bE. OF cOurse, It's fOR ME To deCidE. EmaCs is nOt an implementAtiOn of THe UNicodE StanDard: emAcs _foLlows_ tHe UniCoDe recommendatioNs whEre we deciDe iT tO be UsEful/pRActicaL, anD doEsn't wheRe we don'T. > on wHaT DO YoU base your claim that ThIS PrOblem occUrs relATiVeLY rarely iN pRacTice? tHIs is tHe kiND oF > statemeNt that ONlY a SpecialIsT linguIsT/stAtiSticiAN can Make. AnD have you Taken INto account the tYPe of > demographICs WHO uSE EmaCs' bIdi feature aNd thE KindS of tEXtS thEY're liKely tO tYPe? iT doesn't take a statistIcIan/linGuist To realize that. Long lines tHAT Wrap on EmAcs dISpLAy are rare to begIn witH. lines with PRedominaNtly RtL text in lTR paragrAPHs are rarE, anD liKewIse LINeS with predominANTly LtR Text in RtL pAragrapHs. mUltIplYinG 2 rAre cases mAkes the rEsUlT vErY raRe > ConTRary to whAt You SaId, mY persONal expErienCe shOw ThAT thIs is a maJOr INConvEnIeNce, aNd tHaT it is A > sitUAtiOn that oCcurs very OftEN, almOsT eVery parAgraph, in fact, sInCe I write prImAriLy LaTex DOcuments > Where English markup is intERmixed wIth PredoMinaNtly HebreW teXt contAinINg freqUent quOtes fRoM EnGLIsh > teXTBoOks AnD articles. LAtEX dOcumeNtS can Easily wOrk around the probleM By bReaking long liNes Into SHOrTer ONeS. > yes, BrEAkiNG Lines is a possiblE workarounD fOR LATex, but it mAKes FoR ugly anD erratiC lookINg paragRaphs > that Are difficUlT to rEAD anD edit. I fail To see why It would be UGly or HArD to reAd. ESpeciaLlY siNce yoU can noW HavE a difFerent PaRagrapH direCtIon after Every newline. Perhaps you nEed to bReak lIneS more judiCioUSly, Not at randOm poInts. > And whaT abOut DocumEntS That aRe noT lateX? wHat woRkarOUnd do they > HAvE? PlAIN tExt documentS,
, > in an aspect that is o nly tangen tiall y r ela te d to  reo rdering > bidi r ecti onal text for display,  andth a t ra i se s its  head i n  s i t uat io ns  >th a tare r ela tivelyrare in pr act ic e, and in ma n yof those r are  cases > can  be  easil ywor k ed ar oun d bybreaki n g long  lines. >  > One of the val u a bl e as pects of an ISO s t an d ard is that it  is no tl ef t tothe  personalju dgmen t  of a p r og r a m mer > to decide w hat is wort h  im plemen ti ng, and ho w todo so.  It is notforyou to de cide w h at is a minor d etailand  >what is  a  ma jo r  on e ,wha t  is  tangent ia land w hati s c ore.  Yo u ne ed to  implement it  to  the let ter,or el se y ou  > ca n't cl aim c on formance, no ma tter  how slig htyo u i ma giney our de via tio n to be . Of co u rse ,i t ' sfor me to decide.Em a c sis not a n impl e me nt a tion ofth e U nico d e  Stan dard :  E macs _fo llows_ th eUnicode  r ecomme nd ati ons  wher e  wedecide  it to b e use f ul/practical,a nd doesn't wh e re w ed on't . >  On what do  you base  you r  c lai m  that  this  p r ob l em occurs relativel yrarely  in p ractice? This  is the ki n d of > sta teme n tt hat only a spe ciali st linguis t /statist ician  can mak e. And ha v e  you tak enint o a cco u n tthe type of > d emog ra phics w house Ema cs'  bi difea tu re and th e kindsof  t ex ts  th ey're likely t otyp e?  It  does n 't tak e a s tati st ic i an/ linguis t  t o real iz ethat . l on g lin es t h atwrap on  Emacs di spl a y ar era re to b egin with. li ne s with pre do min antlyR T L text i n LTR paragraphs are ra r e, andlik ewise  lin es with p red ominan tly LTR te xt inRTL p ar agr a p hs. m u l ti ply in g 2 rare c a s esmakes  t he r esult v ery rare > Contrar y  to  what you sai d,my p e r so nal ex p eri en c e s h o w that this isa major in co n ve nience, an d  th at  it isa > sit uatio n  that o ccurs ver y often,al most e ver y paragrap h, in fa ct, since I wri t eprima ril y LaTe Xdoc ument s > wh e reEngli sh mar ku p is i nterm ix ed withpredominantly Hebrew te xt con taini ngfrequentquo t esfrom Engl ish> textbook s a ndartic les .  LaTe X do c um ent s  caneasi l y work ar o un d t h e  p roblem by b r e a kin g lon g l i nes in to s horter ones. > Ye s , breaking lin es i s a p oss i blewo rkaround for L aTe x, b ut it ma ke s for uglyand erra ti c  look ing pa ragrap hs > th a t  a r e diff icul t t o read an d e di t . I fai lto see wh y it  w ould b e ugly or h a r d to read. Espec ially s incey oucan n ow  have a diff erent para graph direc tion a fter  ever y newli ne . Perh aps  y ou need to break lin es mo re judi ci ousl y,not at  ran d o m poi nts.  >  An d what ab o u td oc um e nts  tha t are  n ot L aTeX? Wha t  workaro und do they  >  ha v e ? Plai n  t e x t document s,
, >_in an_aspect that is only_tangentially related_to_reordering >_bidirectional_text for display,_and that raises_its head in situations_> that are_relatively_rare in practice, and in many of those rare cases > can be easily_worked_around by_breaking_long_lines. > > One of_the valuable aspects of an_ISO standard_is that it is not left to the_personal_judgment of a_programmer > to decide what is worth implementing, and_how to do so. It is_not for you_to_decide_what is a minor_detail and > what is a_major one, what is tangential and_what is core. You need to implement_it to the letter, or else_you > can't claim conformance,_no matter_how slight you imagine your_deviation to be._Of course,_it's for me_to decide. Emacs is not an_implementation of the_Unicode Standard: Emacs _follows_ the Unicode_recommendations_where we decide_it_to_be useful/practical,_and doesn't where_we_don't. >_On_what do you base your claim_that_this problem occurs relatively rarely in practice?_This is the kind_of_> statement that only_a specialist linguist/statistician can make._And have you taken into account_the type_of >_demographics who use Emacs' bidi feature and the kinds of texts_they're likely to type? It doesn't_take a statistician/linguist to_realize that._long_lines that wrap_on_Emacs display_are rare to begin with. lines with_predominantly RTL_text in LTR paragraphs are rare,_and likewise lines with_predominantly_LTR text in RTL paragraphs. multiplying_2 rare cases makes the result_very rare > Contrary to_what_you_said, my personal experience show_that this is a major inconvenience,_and that it_is a > situation that occurs very_often,_almost every paragraph, in fact, since_I_write primarily LaTeX documents > where_English_markup_is intermixed with predominantly Hebrew_text containing frequent quotes from English_> textbooks and articles. LaTeX documents can easily work_around the problem_by breaking long lines into_shorter_ones._> Yes, breaking lines is a possible workaround for LaTex,_but it_makes for ugly_and erratic looking paragraphs > that are difficult to read_and edit. I fail to see why_it would be ugly or hard to read. Especially since you_can now have a different paragraph direction after_every newline. Perhaps you need to break_lines more judiciously, not_at_random points. > And what about documents_that_are_not_LaTeX? What workaround_do they >_have? Plain text_documents,