From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bidi,gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: improving bidi documents display Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 06:02:13 +0200 Message-ID: <8362s4olh6.fsf@gnu.org> References: <837hcpryxr.fsf@gnu.org> <87wrklpzii.fsf@maru.md5i.com> <83aahhnpr3.fsf@gnu.org> <8739n9dkwg.fsf@catnip.gol.com> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1298865757 21258 80.91.229.12 (28 Feb 2011 04:02:37 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 04:02:37 +0000 (UTC) Cc: eli.osherovich@gmail.com, md5i@md5i.com, emacs-bidi@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Miles Bader Original-X-From: emacs-bidi-bounces+gnu-emacs-bidi=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Feb 28 05:02:31 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: gnu-emacs-bidi@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PtuJW-0002S4-Ka for gnu-emacs-bidi@m.gmane.org; Mon, 28 Feb 2011 05:02:26 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43193 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PtuJV-0005Mv-J3 for gnu-emacs-bidi@m.gmane.org; Sun, 27 Feb 2011 23:02:25 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=47932 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PtuJO-0005KB-GH for emacs-bidi@gnu.org; Sun, 27 Feb 2011 23:02:23 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PtuJF-0002s1-1S for emacs-bidi@gnu.org; Sun, 27 Feb 2011 23:02:18 -0500 Original-Received: from mtaout20.012.net.il ([80.179.55.166]:53533) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PtuJE-0002rl-Ot; Sun, 27 Feb 2011 23:02:09 -0500 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout20.012.net.il by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0LHB0070075OCE00@a-mtaout20.012.net.il>; Mon, 28 Feb 2011 06:02:07 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([77.126.183.216]) by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0LHB007XF77HBP00@a-mtaout20.012.net.il>; Mon, 28 Feb 2011 06:02:07 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: <8739n9dkwg.fsf@catnip.gol.com> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) X-Received-From: 80.179.55.166 X-BeenThere: emacs-bidi@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of Emacs support for multi-directional text." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-bidi-bounces+gnu-emacs-bidi=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-bidi-bounces+gnu-emacs-bidi=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bidi:847 gmane.emacs.devel:136587 Archived-At: > From: Miles Bader > Cc: Michael Welsh Duggan , eli.osherovich@gmail.com, emacs-bidi@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 10:10:07 +0900 > > Eli Zaretskii writes: > >> Another idea would be to allow a text property to override the character > >> type. > > > > Overlay, not text property. The latter modifies the buffer, which is > > not what you want in this case. > > Wouldn't this sort of property potentially affect lots of text in the > buffer? Not necessarily. For example, in a buffer with TeX stuff, the only portions of text that would need such an overlay are the TeX directives (which should always be rendered L2R). > Overlays are not a good choice for such a thing, and the > overlay interface is generally worse for things which really are text > properties, which these seem to be... > > Text-properties could be used `with-silent-modifications' or some-such > to avoid buffer modification, as is usually done with fortification. Text properties have advantages, and they also have disadvantages. Anyway, there's no design yet that was already decided upon for how to support these features. When that design decision is made, whoever makes it will have to consider this issue, of course.