Re: Need for Level Direction Mark

From: Kent Karlsson <>
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2011 19:31:06 +0200

I'm not at all sure the suggested workaround works in general, and not just
in a few examples.

Another possibility, as long as we are just "brain-storming" a bit here, is
to use the bidi category S (Segment Separator) for the LEVEL DIRECTION MARK
(which would be a normally invisible (bidi) format control character). I.e.
it would work just like TAB (as specified in the UBA), except that it
wouldn't do tabbing. But then it would work only for the paragraph bidi
direction. However, the idea that TAB (and the other bidi S characters)
magically cuts through *all* nested bidi levels seems a bit strange to me...
Going just to the closest explicit embedding/(override) level seems less
drastic. Without formally subdividing "S", one could treat different "bidi
S" (old and new) to reset to different levels (to the embedding bidi level
for the new one, and to the paragraph bidi level for the three old ones). (I
know, this would be a form of "option 1" in the PRI.)

    /Kent K

Den 2011-09-13 09:43, skrev "Richard Wordingham"

> This is a summary of what I have already submitted for Public Review
> Issue 205 ( I am mentioning it
> here in case there is something wrong with my idea.
> My basic idea is that one does not a 'level direction mark'. The
> desired effect can be achieved by embedding neutrals in a sequence
> LRM...RLM or RLM...LRM. They will then take on the directionality of
> the embedding by Bidi Rule N2.
> For an example, see my submission. It may be helpful to view the source
> of the full page view, for that has examples in HTML written solely in
> Richard.
Received on Tue Sep 13 2011 - 12:34:25 CDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Tue Sep 13 2011 - 12:34:28 CDT