I think this would fall into the camp of "make one user happy, confuse the
heck out of another." There is no one single, intuitive algorithm that could
be used, which everyone would like.
With that said, I am sure that there are improvements that could be made
here. But they would have to be made by people who do mind the complaining
that will follow from all the people who have other ideas on what makes
----- Original Message -----
From: "Roozbeh Pournader" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: "Unicode List" <email@example.com>
Cc: "Unicode List" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2001 1:38 PM
Subject: Re: Unicode complaints
> On Thu, 15 Mar 2001, Michael (michka) Kaplan wrote:
> > If you use Access 2000 to enter Hebrew data on a non-Hebrew machine, you
> > the ability to input data without the Bidi algorithm being applied till
> > commit the line.
> > This is almost universally hated by anyone who experiences it.
> > Consistency may not seem like a good thing, but some inconsistencies
> > make it worse.
> I believe that a more complex algorithm than bidi is needed for bidi data
> entry. I'm not sure know how such a thing may be implemented, but I have
> some ideas. I think I had explained them a bit here previously, but to be
> short, a usable bidi data entry algorithm should become more visual, with
> cursor moving as it is moving over visual text, and the character that has
> just got pressed usually getting inserted at the cursor position. Also, it
> should have some state.
> For example, when a user is writing RTL text, presses a space, starts
> typing digits, and then another space, almost everyone agress that the
> cursor should jump to the right of the numbers, putting the space there.
> Now consider that she goes to other lines, comes back, and finds that she
> will need another space between the starting text and the number. She
> moves the cursor in the place she wants to enter the text, presses the
> space, and magically it appears somewhere else, after the number.
> You should have got the point.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:21:20 EDT