Re: basic-hebrew RtL-space ?

From: Asmus Freytag (
Date: Tue Nov 02 2004 - 00:42:32 CST

  • Next message: Chris Jacobs: "Re: basic-hebrew RtL-space ?"

    At 09:48 PM 11/1/2004, Doug Ewell wrote:
    >Philippe Verdy <verdy underscore p at wanadoo dot fr> wrote:
    > > Visual entry should never be used. It was used for some legacy
    > > encodings to render text on devices that don't implement the Bidi
    > > algorithm and can only render text as LTR. Nobody enters RTL text in
    > > "pseudo-visual" LTR order; only the logical input order is needed.
    >I've never understood why writing Hebrew or Arabic left-to-right is
    >called "visual" order anyway. These are RTL scripts; they are supposed
    >to be not only written, but also read, right-to-left. Wouldn't a reader
    >of Hebrew or Arabic consider RTL to BE the "visual" order?

    The underlying assumption is that the display device is LTR (if you think
    of a terminal that may make more sense, than if you think of a window in a
    GUI - the latter could be drawn in any order, but the former is usually
    not as flexible).

    At this stage, the word means what it does and the rest is history, so
    any attempts at finding a 'logical' derivation for the term 'visual
    order' in contrast to logical order perhaps add more to the confusion.....


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Nov 02 2004 - 00:43:07 CST