From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel,gmane.emacs.bidi Subject: Re: improving bidi documents display Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2011 22:58:32 -0500 Message-ID: References: <837hcpryxr.fsf@gnu.org> <87wrklpzii.fsf@maru.md5i.com> <83aahhnpr3.fsf@gnu.org> <4D6DA6E6.70509@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <87zkpe9rfp.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <83k4gixj6m.fsf@gnu.org> <83aahdxt74.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1299211131 29687 80.91.229.12 (4 Mar 2011 03:58:51 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 03:58:51 +0000 (UTC) Cc: eli.osherovich@gmail.com, md5i@md5i.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org, emacs-bidi@gnu.org, Miles Bader To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Mar 04 04:58:46 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@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 1PvMA7-0001aV-5S for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 04 Mar 2011 04:58:43 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43067 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PvMA6-0002xL-K1 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 03 Mar 2011 22:58:42 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=46733 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PvMA0-0002us-Uc for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 03 Mar 2011 22:58:37 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PvMA0-00055v-BW for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 03 Mar 2011 22:58:37 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]:53543) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PvM9y-00055g-Dj; Thu, 03 Mar 2011 22:58:34 -0500 Original-Received: from [207.96.179.97] (port=51477 helo=ceviche.home) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PvM9x-0000Zg-9n; Thu, 03 Mar 2011 22:58:33 -0500 Original-Received: by ceviche.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 448F2660D6; Thu, 3 Mar 2011 22:58:32 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <83aahdxt74.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Wed, 02 Mar 2011 20:39:43 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-Received-From: 140.186.70.10 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:136747 gmane.emacs.bidi:861 Archived-At: > This one's different, believe me: no other text property changes the > _order_ of characters on display in creative ways. It could easily > render the text illegible, under just the right circumstances. Other > text properties are either non-intrusive, or are almost immediately > fixed by JIT Lock, or are simply rare enough to not get in our way. But isn't it the case that the properties we'd add in this case would also be added via jit-lock? So they'd very naturally belong in yank-excluded-properties. Stefan