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, 09 Feb 2022 15:50:24 +0200 Message-ID: <83v8xoup27.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> <83ee4l78rw.fsf@gnu.org> <83tudf2h4z.fsf@gnu.org> <83sfswz834.fsf@gnu.org> <83leymyfz8.fsf@gnu.org> <83sfstwnve.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="28961"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: psainty@orcon.net.nz, luangruo@yahoo.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org, kevin.legouguec@gmail.com To: rms@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Feb 09 15:47:34 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 1nHoFp-0007G1-WE for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 09 Feb 2022 15:47:34 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:33726 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nHoFo-0005qz-BF for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 09 Feb 2022 09:47:32 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:35302) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nHnMn-0002TM-Oe for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 09 Feb 2022 08:50:50 -0500 Original-Received: from [2001:470:142:3::e] (port=57222 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 1nHnMn-0005hR-4W; Wed, 09 Feb 2022 08:50:41 -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=NIUpUbp1rgxrug63YASxQ85iKwe221ThbhYFF6O7qNw=; b=qdE2jODBpRwacOeQgvgC aI/sGkAurtGT1l0kY2FmKULLQOXAuU1hk3PXn3cGSsqqB9Cs18qdMb7RWiGT00DsHI12wCi0pcSOi KguenJkSTjRPxSUN0xfv+ln/spyUpc+KNcpYn+gXgsAOoglx6C50YIeDv2EoehsKO0UfC3jovYmhg BqEmPgXaf0YVHQbp4j9QSjPX5D/TDXCFJe3UU+z+ok2YwpUO0ntuY5YQNI3urcF3McPmIbzfJBrFF vwBLBrsE3Av8e7Hj0NELL/6NIMGIR95IoJxfxXQC9A9MEEVziZOREXU8rjbotfok6J/YXpKwIOlDF NY52s+Q6nx6mYA==; Original-Received: from [87.69.77.57] (port=2300 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 1nHnMe-0007wW-Ih; Wed, 09 Feb 2022 08:50:40 -0500 In-Reply-To: (message from Richard Stallman on Tue, 08 Feb 2022 23:06:26 -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:286098 Archived-At: > From: Richard Stallman > Cc: psainty@orcon.net.nz, luangruo@yahoo.com, > kevin.legouguec@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2022 23:06:26 -0500 > > However, some of those COMBINING forms have no non-COMBINING counterpart. > For instance, there is COMBINING ZIGZAG ABOVE, but no ZIGZAG ABOVE. > > How do you represent an uncombined zigzag-above in Unicode? > Put it after SPACE as a combination? If I understand correctly what you want, you should use U+25CC DOTTED CIRCLE before the combining character, not SPACE. > > My point is that there isn't a mechanical way of producing "o/" from > > ΓΈ, because Unicode decompositions don't support that. > > It wouldn't be very hard to add a list of extra decompositions that > are not known to Unicode itself. Sure, but that means we'd need some manually-maintained database anyway.