From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel
Subject: Re: [emacs-bidi] Treatment of LRE,RLE,LRO,RLO,PDF,LRM,RLM
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2010 17:06:08 +0200
Message-ID: <83vd3s9grj.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <tl7hbis1xop.fsf@m17n.org>
	<AANLkTinrGPzGquxPmfigvZLzGbids39yU942sfwKGMYk@mail.gmail.com>
	<tl7vd77z591.fsf@m17n.org> <tl7vd4hv4ry.fsf@m17n.org>
	<83bp5te3s8.fsf@gnu.org> <tl7ipzwr49k.fsf@m17n.org>
	<E1PIh5b-0001Q2-OP@fencepost.gnu.org>
	<m3lj4s5cus.fsf@linux-m68k.org> <83eiajdee6.fsf@gnu.org>
	<jwvlj4rbiym.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org> <8339qycsa4.fsf@gnu.org>
	<jwv7hga9t3a.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org>
Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org
X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1290265706 32147 80.91.229.12 (20 Nov 2010 15:08:26 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2010 15:08:26 +0000 (UTC)
Cc: handa@m17n.org, schwab@linux-m68k.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org
To: Stefan Monnier <monnier@IRO.UMontreal.CA>
Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Nov 20 16:08:21 2010
Return-path: <emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
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 <emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>)
	id 1PJp37-0001d8-9C
	for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 20 Nov 2010 16:08:21 +0100
Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36916 helo=lists.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
	id 1PJp36-0005Sb-HW
	for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 20 Nov 2010 10:08:20 -0500
Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=39211 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PJp2w-0005RJ-VM
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 20 Nov 2010 10:08:12 -0500
Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <eliz@gnu.org>) id 1PJp2v-0002BR-A3
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 20 Nov 2010 10:08:10 -0500
Original-Received: from mtaout23.012.net.il ([80.179.55.175]:33621)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <eliz@gnu.org>)
	id 1PJp2v-0002BE-3J
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 20 Nov 2010 10:08:09 -0500
Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout23.012.net.il by
	a-mtaout23.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id
	<0LC600M00V3ZNM00@a-mtaout23.012.net.il> for
	emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 20 Nov 2010 17:08:07 +0200 (IST)
Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([77.124.52.47]) by a-mtaout23.012.net.il
	(HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id
	<0LC600MLNVDHENC0@a-mtaout23.012.net.il>;
	Sat, 20 Nov 2010 17:08:06 +0200 (IST)
In-reply-to: <jwv7hga9t3a.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org>
X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il
X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta)
X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." <emacs-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=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:132916
Archived-At: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel/132916>

> From: Stefan Monnier <monnier@IRO.UMontreal.CA>
> Cc: schwab@linux-m68k.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org, handa@m17n.org
> Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 17:15:44 -0500
> 
> >> > Btw, how to display code points smaller than 256? \uNN or \u00NN?
> >> I think \u00NN is the clear winner.
> 
> > It's according to RFC 5137, so yes.
> 
> > But what about code points above MAX_UNICODE_CHAR?  Currently we
> > display them as [E+NNNNNN].  Use \eNNNNNN?
> 
> I think \xNNNNNN would be preferable, since that's what we
> use elsewhere.

Done.