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: Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:36:50 +0200 Message-ID: <83ee48sfhp.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> <83v8xoup27.fsf@gnu.org> <835ypnutj8.fsf@gnu.org> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="34142"; 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 Sat Feb 12 08:38:38 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 1nImzO-0008hi-BO for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 12 Feb 2022 08:38:38 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:60890 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nImzL-0007ZI-UV for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 12 Feb 2022 02:38:35 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:52112) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nImxs-0006my-JN for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 12 Feb 2022 02:37:04 -0500 Original-Received: from [2001:470:142:3::e] (port=58926 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 1nImxs-0000uK-7Z; Sat, 12 Feb 2022 02:37:04 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date: mime-version; bh=Bm7FORhzPZRGpXAofdKAB8wHh3lqrwnXpWrSe/vW9hs=; b=o+gTpWCDiJth RA47ax1Uv40msnVxOlcZm/zmY9aDwlnnSFxgH9KKg+Kjv7BWBSCyNmA3RPuwXe6jK+bLtrNIAtrYX h21BnSs/oCiy1e9nw6C0kJZy+xo/6XiVFv5mbswHf1qDAO4USe2Xe88ffbFliZ9NsSc1rlIx2yKuy PebjXoy7P6fWX/fEkRaHEil7M4UsDjXcBcmmal3n3+jyhdKuhCmgMvppzKUfVIYHXBERVe6yDQa/Z Ub/zfWrVgBl6lqZG0pXMuQCXh5un2rrd0Rln9QbmsldmJTy3+zKI8gsiHOuBhbkkx1OQuTzwOR9kJ S4Yp5rucgD3/Z9qtlzV/Gw==; Original-Received: from [87.69.77.57] (port=2082 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 1nImxk-0000Vy-GK; Sat, 12 Feb 2022 02:36:57 -0500 In-Reply-To: (message from Richard Stallman on Fri, 11 Feb 2022 22:57:07 -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:286178 Archived-At: > From: Richard Stallman > Cc: psainty@orcon.net.nz, luangruo@yahoo.com, > kevin.legouguec@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2022 22:57:07 -0500 > > > We disagree about whether this is a significant simplification. > > Looking at the giant Lynx-derived database in latin1-disp.el, I fail > > to see how making a small part of it auto-generated would be a win. > > I had not seen that list before. > > Earlier you said that the a(? translation was made by hand, so I am > somewhat confused now. > > Most of those entries are for characters without diacritics, it seems, > and I'm not talking about those. My objection is to some translations > of letters with diacritics. Their meanings are not guessable. I want > to replace them with sequences people will be able to understand at > first sight. Then please suggest replacements you consider to be better, and let's make those replacements. We are not bound by what Lynx does, we just used that as a source. > If the easiest way to do that is by editing that list, ok. Yes, that's what I was trying to say all the time: let's edit that list directly. That way, we get to see all the entries, and can easily judge whether the method of expressing the diacritics is consistent and looks reasonably well. > But maybe those characters don't need to be in the list at all. This was your proposal about generating some of the entries. I think it will be harder to maintain, because the effects of a change in expressing some diacritic are not immediately evident -- you don't see all of the affected characters.