From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Can watermarking Unicode text using invisible differences sneak through Emacs, or can Emacs detect it? Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2022 14:28:03 +0200 Message-ID: <83ee4l78rw.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87sftk49ih.fsf@yahoo.com> <837dawt0h4.fsf@gnu.org> <838rv9plyf.fsf@gnu.org> <837dasntoj.fsf@gnu.org> <834k5tl4a9.fsf@gnu.org> <87mtjkt6m9.fsf@gmail.com> <83ilu8htws.fsf@gnu.org> <3E718CA2-889F-4AEE-B79C-EB3A221D1CB2@gnu.org> <83o83wc7gs.fsf@gnu.org> <8335l5brov.fsf@gnu.org> <83mtjc838i.fsf@gnu.org> <83zgna7hyd.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="36423"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: psainty@orcon.net.nz, luangruo@yahoo.com, kevin.legouguec@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: rms@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Feb 02 13:43:08 2022 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1nFEyZ-0009NF-Nh for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 02 Feb 2022 13:43:07 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:47346 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nFEyY-00019D-3C for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 02 Feb 2022 07:43:06 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:51598) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nFEkD-0004vx-TO for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Feb 2022 07:28:17 -0500 Original-Received: from [2001:470:142:3::e] (port=59208 helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nFEk7-00056S-Pz; Wed, 02 Feb 2022 07:28:16 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-version:References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From: Date; bh=8h2gBaWM50h220+yliY/fwv/TjK3BZkEh0DDStbBngQ=; b=KuENmfmdID1q4Wcwm0Gc Im8K8Qm/TTuRFixO/r8llWkH4dGr37jYTD5VUqlJ3fNx3gr8jnlNUXcpofdj5icInJ9DAYManL70Q bIVz+/yyL1d7gH8ElnOLXLMC3M9GDll6ZE5TlNJMHP+FQ8cgJT7S3AHi9C0mpEbgQRmNAeF893DGW 5+cNzhFeeOgFrPJEtF6DXagO1TUCaad2Mfd/iM5WxsrR8nS7J4rkK8cOU88NqIFRQeIs9NX7rD8cW Bm6XXbKqF/4TcAc+3Smpw/BzHuqUDNEb5+Lc55HEQn1lwli/PVJoXTb/mVUOq4YL/aGXpH4FsYIjm xRO2Tm3M98FY4A==; Original-Received: from [87.69.77.57] (port=3039 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nFEjy-0003VC-DK; Wed, 02 Feb 2022 07:28:06 -0500 In-Reply-To: (message from Richard Stallman on Tue, 01 Feb 2022 22:58:49 -0500) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:285782 Archived-At: > From: Richard Stallman > Cc: psainty@orcon.net.nz, luangruo@yahoo.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org, > kevin.legouguec@gmail.com > Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2022 22:58:49 -0500 > > > If you rotate "(?" 90 degrees counter-clockwise, you'll get something > > resembling the breve and the tilde above it. > > I'd never have thought of trying that. > > How about using ã¯? That doesn't seem to remind anything like the original. Moreover, the feature as implemented only uses ASCII characters in the translations. > That takes up only two character spaces and it makes sense without > turning your head 90 degrees. It could test whether the terminal > can display ã and macro, and if not, fall back on some other > alternative. We could have alternatives like that, but it would have to be a better-looking alternative, since replacing one imperfect emulation with another that's not better doesn't sound like an improvement to me.