From: Konstantin Ritt (email@example.com)
Date: Wed Jun 09 2010 - 00:09:47 CDT
2010/6/9 Masaaki Shibata <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> The result of CP x PO must be the same on both rule-based and regex
> implementation (i.e. "×") anyhow.
NU x CP x PO but CL ÷ PO
regexp-based implementation can look forward and backward for NU but
pairtable-based implementation cann't (well, it can by costs of some
overhead and additional complexity). guess, thats a reason why recommended
`( PR | PO) ? ( OP | HY ) ? NU (NU | SY | IS) * (CL | CP) ? ( PR | PO) ?`
was approximated in LB25.
btw, whole note
In general, it is recommended to not break lines inside numbers of the form
described by the following regular expression:
( PR | PO) ? ( OP | HY ) ? NU (NU | SY | IS) * (CL | CP) ? ( PR | PO) ?
Examples: $(12.35) 2,1234 (12)¢ 12.54¢
The default line breaking algorithm approximates this with the following
rule. Note that some cases have already been handled, such as ‘9,’, ‘[9’.
For a tailoring that supports the regular expression directly, as well as a
key to the notation see Section 8.2, Examples of Customization.
is related to LB25 and not to LB24 and I think it should be visualized
respectively to clarify it's relationship to LB25
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jun 09 2010 - 00:16:07 CDT