From: Peter Kirk (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Sat Aug 16 2003 - 17:03:56 EDT
On 16/08/2003 13:14, Doug Ewell wrote:
>You could make a case for proposing numeric values of 10 through 15 to
>be added to U+0044 through U+0049 and U+0064 through U+0069, based on
>their undeniably widespread use as hexadecimal digits. (No, I don't
>want to get into a debate about the word "digit" implying "ten.") But
>the differences in the other categories are less convincing. Latin
>letters are L& (strong LTR) while the digits are EN (weak LTR), but you
>may have a difficult time finding a non-pathological context in which
>European numerals are legitimately used RTL.
I wonder if this is a real, legitimate and non-pathological case where
there might be a difference: hex digits embedded in Hebrew text,
followed by a comma. In modern Hebrew numbers are written with European
digits LTR embedded in RTL text, and a comma etc following the numeral
should probably appear to the left of it. I would guess that Israeli
programmers use hex digits LTR and sometimes embed them in Hebrew text.
But a comma will probably come out to the right of the hex number if it
looks like a Latin script word. Look at the following, which each
consist of three Hebrew letters, space, hex digit, comma, space, three
Hebrew letters. Well, the bidi algorithm messes them up on my screen, in
Word 2002 and in Mozilla. But maybe someone can see the difference.
בצד 1, בצד
בצד A, בצד
But I am not suggesting that this problem is sufficiently serious to
justify encoding a new set of hex digits.
-- Peter Kirk email@example.com (personal) firstname.lastname@example.org (work) http://www.qaya.org/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Aug 16 2003 - 17:34:03 EDT