Re: Vertical BIDI

From: fantasai (
Date: Fri May 14 2004 - 23:15:12 CDT

  • Next message: Anto'nio Martins-Tuva'lkin: "Re: Middle stroke of U+042D"

    Ernest Cline wrote:
    > Only because of the way that Unicode handles vertical scripts by
    > assigning them a LTR direction and leaving it up to higher
    > levels to make the perpendicular flip. If someone wanted to include
    > a vertical snippet of Ogham in a top to bottom script, they might
    > desire to have the Ogham go from bottom to top, and that would
    > make RTL Ogham reasonable in that context.

    This is a shortcoming in Unicode BIDI: it currently only represents
    horizontal directionality, not vertical directionality. As far as I
    am aware, Ogham should never go right-to-left on a horizontal line,
    and forcing it to be RTL just to accomodate a particular vertical
    presentation would be wrong. (Take away the "vertical text" directive,
    and the line becomes rtl horizontal.)

    > It is a pedantic edge case that ought to be considered once
    > raised (as it has been) even though I wouldn't recommend
    > actively seeking out other such edge cases. :)

    There are other, more common cases that would require Unicode to
    consider vertical directionality. Correct handling of Ogham would
    follow from that naturally.



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri May 14 2004 - 23:18:28 CDT