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: Thu, 03 Feb 2022 09:53:30 +0200 Message-ID: <837dac5qth.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> 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="16479"; 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 Thu Feb 03 09:10:51 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 1nFXCc-00047z-SF for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 03 Feb 2022 09:10:51 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:53062 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nFXCa-0007xR-W9 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 03 Feb 2022 03:10:49 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:48802) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nFWw8-0001wV-Hj for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 03 Feb 2022 02:53:51 -0500 Original-Received: from [2001:470:142:3::e] (port=57026 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 1nFWw8-0003jV-6o; Thu, 03 Feb 2022 02:53:48 -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=e6U1POe9zocq7YOWo0GZaSZzyNv4LP8RbiZ6Jgx1ZmQ=; b=Zhjs31U5k+BzMGzs3ODl V6+z+CQP/177AGBqdt6IlpxUUWMbgb/rItoAOGr4fWfQ61H8+kYr5mau8kBe2kE5lyb1I8cTyys7C HO9N/Wc8r6Bj4WcRwpVcXaIplLjS955gZFgkhRdznWcs+RdraVLa6pIBLhAyvz07XHnjbEQDtsfx2 TT29t0N7QZlVK3/yjxGajYy44bXHbSYUZrYiaXdbmV1QTrygPWN6v5Nm3Yiia6LJZ8DiDBbkxpjMG eofc7lokZHH0NLdIlMC4qVFntx77ugnfVvAv01XvVGWh1X4rb/qPU3/YZkJAWUazIcdiTZmTfTJxD 5yeT/sa3vIWZrg==; Original-Received: from [87.69.77.57] (port=3118 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 1nFWvm-0006Qs-3i; Thu, 03 Feb 2022 02:53:27 -0500 In-Reply-To: (message from Richard Stallman on Wed, 02 Feb 2022 23:23:56 -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:285833 Archived-At: > From: Richard Stallman > Cc: psainty@orcon.net.nz, luangruo@yahoo.com, > kevin.legouguec@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2022 23:23:56 -0500 > > > > How about using ã¯? > > > That doesn't seem to remind anything like the original. > > Sorry, somehow I misremembered and thought the character was a with > macron and tilde. Was it actually a with breve and tilde? Yes. > Then the natural visual representations would be ă~ (a with breve, > then tilde) and ã˘ (a with tilde, then breve), Either one would be fine, but the former is better, I think, since ~ is an ASCII character, and so is universally supported. > > 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. > > It is much better. > > I would never hae guessed what a(? meant, just from seeing it. > ă~ I could guess -- it's an a, with a breve and a tilde. > Once I know it's a single character, because C-f moves over it, > it would have to be a-with-breve-and-tilde. Feel free to propose alternatives for such characters, which could be better represented by an accented character followed by the rest of accents expressed as ASCII equivalents (there's not a lot of them, btw). I don't have access to a Linux console to see which ones could be supported.