From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [emacs-bidi] Treatment of LRE,RLE,LRO,RLO,PDF,LRM,RLM Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 07:26:15 -0500 Message-ID: References: <83bp5te3s8.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1289996787 19811 80.91.229.12 (17 Nov 2010 12:26:27 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 12:26:27 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Kenichi Handa Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Nov 17 13:26:23 2010 Return-path: 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 ) id 1PIh5i-0005B3-Vw for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 13:26:23 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38278 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PIh5i-0005OS-EZ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 07:26:22 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=37345 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PIh5e-0005OD-AO for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 07:26:19 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PIh5d-0002yH-Fh for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 07:26:18 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]:34105) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PIh5d-0002yD-Cy for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 07:26:17 -0500 Original-Received: from eliz by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PIh5b-0001Q2-OP; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 07:26:15 -0500 In-reply-to: (message from Kenichi Handa on Wed, 17 Nov 2010 12:57:27 +0900) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-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:132779 Archived-At: > From: Kenichi Handa > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, jasonr@gnu.org > Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 12:57:27 +0900 > > > . changed TTY display top enclose U+nnnn and "empty box" displays in > > "[]", to simulate a box and make the display easier to read. > > For U+NNNN, I decided not to use "[]" because it takes too > many columns. I thought underline or some background color > (customizable through a face) was enough. Don't you think 8 > columns (instead of 6 columns) is annoying? It is annoying allright, but [U+1234][U+5678] is more readable than U+1234U+5678. However, if others disagree, I can change that back. > > . documented this feature in NEWS and in the manual. > > I dared not write that because I have not yet made my mind > which is better; current glyphless-char-display or extending > the normal display-table. By the way, one other issue is that display tables take precedence over glyphless-char-display, in the sense that characters for which there are non-trivial entries in the current display table are displayed using the display table, disregarding any glyphless-char-display-control settings. If this is what we want, we should probably document that.