headers
Noam Shomron | 1 Jun 15:31
Picon
Favicon

Re: SPAM (was Wonderful book about God! )

>>>From: Matan Ninio <emacs-bidi <at> el.ninio.org>
>>>Subject: Re: SPAM (was [emacs-bidi] Wonderful book about God! )
>>>
>>>This is annoying and is getter more and more common.  How about making
>>>this a only-members-can-post newsgroup?  or at least appealing some
>>>spam-filtering on the input from non-members?  
>>>

Hi,

I am not sure what spam filtering (if any) is being done by default (but note
that the particular message that annoyed you actually made it through my
usually very good personal filter, at least the first time---nothing is perfect).
I am hesitant about restricting posting to members, because it may create headaches
for persons who may want to post to the list from several email addresses, but
we can certainly do it, if spam becomes a problem.

>>>
>>>I mean, I wouldn't mind, but this list is *so* quite recently, which is
>>>sad enough, and the spam is just adding insult to injury.
>>>

Since the existence of this mailing list is public, it is not too suprising
that it was marked for spam.  I completely agree that it is a sign of a sad, sad
world.

>>>PS, is anything moving in the bidi-front?  Things looked very good about
>>>a year ago, and then suddenly all this quite. :-(
>>>
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Moe Elzubeir | 7 Jun 19:27
Picon

Arabic+Bidi


Salam,

I have just come to learn of this list, and was wondering what the status of Arabic+Bidi support on GNU Emacs was.

Thanks
Mohammed Elzubeir
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Eli Zaretskii | 9 Jun 07:37
Picon

Re: [emacs-bidi]Arabic+Bidi


On Fri, 7 Jun 2002, Moe Elzubeir wrote:

> I have just come to learn of this list, and was wondering what the status of Arabic+Bidi support on GNU Emacs was.

Still very much in limbo, unfortunately.
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Moe Elzubeir | 10 Jun 22:00
Picon

Re: [emacs-bidi]Arabic+Bidi


So I take it we are at square 0? I mean, where do I look to see exactly
what needs to be implemented and what the agreed upon approach(es) if
any.

Thanks

>>> Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> is.elta.co.il> 06/09/02 12:37AM >>>

On Fri, 7 Jun 2002, Moe Elzubeir wrote:

> I have just come to learn of this list, and was wondering what the
status of Arabic+Bidi support on GNU Emacs was.

Still very much in limbo, unfortunately.
Permalink | Reply | 501 comments |
headers
Eli Zaretskii | 11 Jun 07:39
Picon

Re: Re: [emacs-bidi]Arabic+Bidi


On Mon, 10 Jun 2002, Moe Elzubeir wrote:

> So I take it we are at square 0?

Not exactly, but close.

> I mean, where do I look to see exactly
> what needs to be implemented and what the agreed upon approach(es) if
> any.

You can look in the archives of this mailing list.
Permalink | Reply | 501 comments |
headers
Tim Freedom | 16 Jun 00:12
Picon
Favicon

Bidi - will it happen ?

On Tue, 11 Jun 2002 08:39:23 +0300 (IDT),
  Eli Zaretskii eliz <at> is.elta.co.il wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 10 Jun 2002, Moe Elzubeir wrote:
> > So I take it we are at square 0 ?
> 
> Not exactly, but close.
> 
> > I mean, where do I look to see exactly
> > what needs to be implemented and what the agreed upon
> > approach(es) if any.
> 
> You can look in the archives of this mailing list.

I'm at a loss here, why is it that qemacs

  http://fabrice.bellard.free.fr/qemacs

has been able to include bidi where-as emacs hasn't ?
Mind you I haven't been able to compile the package
(to verify for myself), but his claims still stand.

I know nothing of lisp (let alone elisp), but can't
the inclusion of fribidi (fribidi.sf.net) be
incorporated somehow into the emacs code even as an
external call for the time being (irrespective of
inefficiency, ugliness, etc - given the user opts for
its inclusion) ?

There is a major disconnect on this topic if one were
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 1252 comments |
headers
Tzafrir Cohen | 16 Jun 00:53
Picon
Favicon

Re: Bidi - will it happen ?

On Sat, 15 Jun 2002, Tim Freedom wrote:

> On Tue, 11 Jun 2002 08:39:23 +0300 (IDT),
> Eli Zaretskii eliz <at> is.elta.co.il wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 10 Jun 2002, Moe Elzubeir wrote:
> > > So I take it we are at square 0 ?
> >
> > Not exactly, but close.
> >
> > > I mean, where do I look to see exactly
> > > what needs to be implemented and what the agreed upon
> > > approach(es) if any.
> >
> > You can look in the archives of this mailing list.
>
> I'm at a loss here, why is it that qemacs
>
> http://fabrice.bellard.free.fr/qemacs
>
> has been able to includebidi where-as emacs hasn't ?
> Mind you I haven't been able to compile the package
> (to verify for myself), but his claims still stand.

qemacs is not emacs.

qemacs is an editor with a number of similarities to emacs (mainly in the
looks and behaviour. However, it is more of a light-weight text editor.
Not much of a programable text-editor-and-a-kitchen-sink like emacs.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 1253 comments |
headers
Tim Freedom | 16 Jun 03:04
Picon
Favicon

Re: Bidi - will it happen ?

--- Tzafrir Cohen <tzafrir <at> technion.ac.il> wrote:
> On Sat, 15 Jun 2002, Tim Freedom wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, 11 Jun 2002 08:39:23 +0300 (IDT),
> > Eli Zaretskii eliz <at> is.elta.co.il wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, 10 Jun 2002, Moe Elzubeir wrote:
> > > > So I take it we are at square 0 ?
> > >
> > > Not exactly, but close.
> > >
> > > > I mean, where do I look to see exactly
> > > > what needs to be implemented and what the agreed upon
> > > > approach(es) if any.
> > >
> > > You can look in the archives of this mailing list.
> >
> > I'm at a loss here, why is it that qemacs
> >
> > http://fabrice.bellard.free.fr/qemacs
> >
> > has been able to includebidi where-as emacs hasn't ?
> > Mind you I haven't been able to compile the package
> > (to verify for myself), but his claims still stand.
> 
> qemacs is not emacs.
> 
> qemacs is an editor with a number of similarities to emacs (mainly in the
> looks and behaviour. However, it is more of a light-weight text editor.
> Not much of a programable text-editor-and-a-kitchen-sink like emacs.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
Eli Zaretskii | 16 Jun 08:04
Picon

Re: Bidi - will it happen ?


On Sat, 15 Jun 2002, Tim Freedom wrote:

> I'm at a loss here, why is it that qemacs
> 
>   http://fabrice.bellard.free.fr/qemacs
> 
> has been able to include bidi where-as emacs hasn't ?

There's nothing in principle that should prevent Emacs from supporting 
bidirectional editing, except that no one has stepped forward and 
volunteered to do the job.  I'm trying to do that by default, but my 
resources are in short supply lately.

> I know nothing of lisp (let alone elisp), but can't
> the inclusion of fribidi (fribidi.sf.net) be
> incorporated somehow into the emacs code even as an
> external call for the time being (irrespective of
> inefficiency, ugliness, etc - given the user opts for
> its inclusion) ?

We cannot use fribidi (or any other library that requires Emacs to pass 
it a chunk of text to be displayed) because that is incompatible with how 
the Emacsd display engine works.  I explained that several times here; 
you should be able to find the explanation in the archives.

> There is a major disconnect on this topic if one were
> to do any research on it (emacs+bidi that this) on
> google or anywhere else.  m17n.org had claimed that 
> bidi is close at hand (through its various symposiums).
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 8 comments |
headers
Eli Zaretskii | 16 Jun 08:09
Picon

Re: Bidi - will it happen ?


On Sun, 16 Jun 2002, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:

> fribidi is a library that mainly provides a method for converting logical
> Hebrew text to visual Hebrew text (in conformance with the unicode
> standard, and efficiently).
> 
> Actually, from what I understand, a similar algorithm has already been
> implemented in elisp by Eli.

Not exactly.  Handa-san wrote a batch-style Lisp implementation of bidi 
reordering, and demonstrated it 3 years ago.  However, Gerd Moellmann, 
who write the current Emacs display engine, was very unhappy with that 
implementation, and asked for something that doesn't work on large 
batches of characters (for fear that it will slow donw redisplay to an 
unbearable speed).

So I wrote a prototype of a sequential implementation of UAX#9, in C, 
which could be plugged directly into the Emacs display code.  The next 
step is to take that C code and actually put it into Emacs, making the 
necessary changes in the redisplay code as you go.

> Using fribidi or a similar library probably means patching emacs itself.
> It also requires porting to various emacs ports. elisp is probably more
> portable, although has some penalty in performance.

I don't believe an efficient solution for bidi can be coded in Lisp, 
since the redisplay works on the C level.
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |

Gmane