From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Kenichi Handa Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: bidi and shaping problems in describe-input-method Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2012 16:47:11 +0900 Message-ID: References: <8362eczr73.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1331538469 28200 80.91.229.3 (12 Mar 2012 07:47:49 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2012 07:47:49 +0000 (UTC) Cc: list-general@mohsen.1.banan.byname.net, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Mar 12 08:47:48 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1S6zyt-0001JZ-Nm for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 12 Mar 2012 08:47:47 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:35409 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S6zyt-0007v9-5K for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 12 Mar 2012 03:47:47 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:42639) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S6zyX-0007th-Ob for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Mar 2012 03:47:45 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S6zyS-0003Hg-LI for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Mar 2012 03:47:25 -0400 Original-Received: from mx1.aist.go.jp ([150.29.246.133]:63971) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S6zyR-0003HM-Io; Mon, 12 Mar 2012 03:47:20 -0400 Original-Received: from rqsmtp1.aist.go.jp (rqsmtp1.aist.go.jp [150.29.254.115]) by mx1.aist.go.jp with ESMTP id q2C7lCCQ013098; Mon, 12 Mar 2012 16:47:12 +0900 (JST) env-from (handa@m17n.org) Original-Received: from smtp1.aist.go.jp by rqsmtp1.aist.go.jp with ESMTP id q2C7lCti010171; Mon, 12 Mar 2012 16:47:12 +0900 (JST) env-from (handa@m17n.org) Original-Received: by smtp1.aist.go.jp with ESMTP id q2C7lB8t016635; Mon, 12 Mar 2012 16:47:11 +0900 (JST) env-from (handa@m17n.org) In-Reply-To: <8362eczr73.fsf@gnu.org> (message from Eli Zaretskii on Sat, 10 Mar 2012 12:27:28 +0200) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 9 X-Received-From: 150.29.246.133 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:148969 Archived-At: In article <8362eczr73.fsf@gnu.org>, Eli Zaretskii writes: > Yes. But surrounding each `lower' and `upper' key labels in the > layout with LRE..PDF inserts even more bidirectional control > characters than just inserting LRM. By contrast, using LRO..PDF > around the whole row of keys inserts just 2 such characters, so if it > were not for the need to reorder the individual key labels, LRO..PDF > would be a better alternative. I mentioned it because it does exactly > what you originally asked for: it effectively disables > bidi-display-reordering inside the embedded text, while still leaving > the rest of the buffer reordered as usual. I mixed up with LRE and LRO, sorry. Anyway, if LRO..PDF works, it is surely better than many LRMs. I've just installed a proper change including the magic of compose-string. Please try the latest code. --- Kenichi Handa handa@m17n.org