From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Mohsen BANAN Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel,gmane.emacs.bidi Subject: Re: Now: Paragraph Direction Detection and Harmonization Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 11:24:04 -0700 Organization: ByStar Federation of Autonomous Libre Services -- http://www.by-star.net Message-ID: References: <83bpkgl113.fsf@gnu.org> <8362qbsj7p.fsf@gnu.org> <83y636grgj.fsf@gnu.org> <838vuy9prx.fsf@gnu.org> <834o5m9mxs.fsf@gnu.org> <83vcy27zzf.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1303842259 31023 80.91.229.12 (26 Apr 2011 18:24:19 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 18:24:19 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-bidi@gnu.org, Mohsen BANAN , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Apr 26 20:24:14 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QEmvl-00006r-Lz for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 20:24:13 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:37417 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QEmvl-00066b-46 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 14:24:13 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:35597) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QEmvi-00066U-RW for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 14:24:11 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QEmvf-0000dW-N0 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 14:24:10 -0400 Original-Received: from 0016.bacs.by-star.net ([198.62.92.166]:55319) by eggs.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QEmvf-0000cw-6K for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 14:24:07 -0400 Original-Received: (qmail 21952 invoked from network); 26 Apr 2011 11:19:58 -0700 Original-Received: from 192.168.0.187 ([192.168.0.187]) by 0016.bacs.by-star.net ([198.62.92.166]) with ESMTP via TCP; 26 Apr 2011 18:19:58 -0000 In-Reply-To: <83vcy27zzf.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Tue, 26 Apr 2011 01:00:52 +0300") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-Received-From: 198.62.92.166 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:138802 gmane.emacs.bidi:883 Archived-At: >>>>> On Tue, 26 Apr 2011 01:00:52 +0300, Eli Zaretskii said: >> For example, I think that it is worthwhile for >> emacs24 to have a good Conformance Statement for >> http://unicode.org/reports/tr9/ Eli> We already do, see etc/NEWS: Eli> Reordering of bidirectional text for display in Emacs is a "Full Eli> bidirectionality" class implementation of the Unicode Bidirectional Eli> Algorithm. Eli> Is that what you meant by "conformance statement"? If not, what is Eli> it? By a good Conformance Statement, I meant more than that. I meant it in the context of ISO 9646 and concepts of Protocol Implementation Conformance Statement (PICS) Proforma and PICS. To evaluate conformance of a particular implementation, it is necessary to have a statement of the capabilities and options that have been implemented for a given protocol (and bidi can reasonably be regarded a protocol, as it is based on expected behavior). Such a statement is called a Protocol Implementation Conformance Statement (PICS). I don't know if there is a PICS-Proforma for http://unicode.org/reports/tr9/. If there was, it would take the form of tables refering to the base spec asking for details of implementation with regard to each section/option/feature/... of the specification. An example of PICS-Proforma in the RFC Series is: http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1708 Pics is taken more seriously in the ISO/IEC ITU/CCITT cultures. Various people have various opinions on merits of the PICS model. I like the PICS model and have managed to put it to good use in realization of large networks. In the absence of a PICS-Proforma, based on your implementation details, you (or somebody) can go through the specification and include emacs-bidi implementation details and cross-referencing UAX#9 sections. Given the lack of precision for uniformity in determination of say paragraph direction, based on the emacs PICS, we can then visit our sisters at Mozilla and have a conversation towards more harmony. ...Mohsen