From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#22786: 25.1.50; eww arabic rendering Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2016 18:49:32 +0200 Message-ID: <83k2lm6t43.fsf@gnu.org> References: <84fuwjca8b.fsf@gmail.com> <8760xeq5kj.fsf@gnus.org> <84y4aaza45.fsf@gmail.com> <87egc1z71n.fsf@gnus.org> <83wppsg4yj.fsf@gnu.org> <87d1rkvxbx.fsf@gnus.org> <83povjetir.fsf@gnu.org> <878u25xyk0.fsf@gnus.org> <831t7wc06e.fsf@gnu.org> <87vb582qk8.fsf@gnus.org> <837fho9ohr.fsf@gnu.org> <87twksxhed.fsf@gnus.org> <83ziuj8r4d.fsf@gnu.org> <877fhn59hh.fsf@gnus.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1456851029 2639 80.91.229.3 (1 Mar 2016 16:50:29 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2016 16:50:29 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 22786@debbugs.gnu.org, mohamed.hibti@gmail.com To: Lars Ingebrigtsen Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Mar 01 17:50:17 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@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 1aanV0-0001Ic-BN for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 01 Mar 2016 17:50:14 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:50935 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aanUz-0003BY-I2 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 01 Mar 2016 11:50:13 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:59801) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aanUt-000388-QI for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Mar 2016 11:50:10 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aanUo-0005YE-7V for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Mar 2016 11:50:07 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:59406) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aanUo-0005Y9-3x for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Mar 2016 11:50:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1aanUn-0007pG-Vn for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Mar 2016 11:50:01 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2016 16:50:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 22786 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 22786-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B22786.145685099930069 (code B ref 22786); Tue, 01 Mar 2016 16:50:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 22786) by debbugs.gnu.org; 1 Mar 2016 16:49:59 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56533 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1aanUi-0007oq-A6 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 01 Mar 2016 11:49:59 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:40464) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1aanUg-0007oY-3L for 22786@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 01 Mar 2016 11:49:54 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aanUW-0005Tp-Sy for 22786@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 01 Mar 2016 11:49:48 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:35509) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aanUW-0005Tl-PN; Tue, 01 Mar 2016 11:49:44 -0500 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:2239 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1aanUV-0003Iu-3f; Tue, 01 Mar 2016 11:49:44 -0500 In-reply-to: <877fhn59hh.fsf@gnus.org> (message from Lars Ingebrigtsen on Tue, 01 Mar 2016 11:26:34 +1100) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 208.118.235.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:114255 Archived-At: > From: Lars Ingebrigtsen > Cc: mohamed.hibti@gmail.com, 22786@debbugs.gnu.org > Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2016 11:26:34 +1100 > > However, I'm not quite sure how the BDI is supposed to work. With this > example: > >

Here's something with العربيّ lri. > > I would have expected that slapping FSI/PDI pairs around the Arabic text > would isolate it from the LRO that the introduced. But it > doesn't. Should it? Using LRI/RLI instead works, but then I would have > to keep track of what direction the text is already in? No, FSI..PDI is TRT in this case (unless you have etc.). There was a subtle bug in bidi.c which affected this case, now fixed on the emacs-25 branch. With that, you should see the expected result in the above example. > Anyway, this reminds me: Do we have a literal char syntax for these > control characters? Do we have a literal syntax for _any_ character? Btw, these controls display as thin spaces on GUI frames, and as just spaces on a TTY; for best results you could cover each control with an invisible text property, which would make them entirely invisible.