NS - What are your comments on mlterm, patch27, biditext (have you
NS used 'em) ?
I haven't, as I don't speak any Semitic language. Which is exactly
why I cannot make up an opinion before I see a description of what
they are supposed to do.
NS - Irrespective of various minor issues, what
On Tue, 26 Feb 2002 16:05:09 +
Markus Kuhn wrote:
Juliusz Chroboczek wrote on 2002-02-26 10:15 UTC:
- a number of people think that we should ``do BiDi in the terminal
emulator''. They were not willing (or not able?) to define what it
means to ``do BiDi in the terminal
Nadim Shaikli wrote on 2002-02-28 23:48 UTC:
What are your comments on mlterm, patch27, biditext (have you used 'em) ?
Can you send me a compact exact specification of the exact bidi
semantics of these implementations? I haven't seen one yet and I don't
have the time to reverse engineer these.
On 26 Feb 2002, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:
- everyone appeared to agree that there's a need for BiDi at the
curses/slang level. This means that the terminal emulator-level BiDi,
if any, must be switchable. For some reason, nobody seems interested
in implementing BiDi at the
On 26 Feb 2002, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:
- some people produced analogies with luit, which to me seems to
imply a lack of understanding of what luit does (luit has *no* notion
of cursor position). Unless I'm missing something, BiDi really
needs access to internal terminal emulator
This is correct.
The original CTL project make modifications to Motif 2.1, and
a couple of CDE components (dtterm (terminal emulator), and dtcm
(calander manager)).
Dan
Message: 2
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [I18n]So, will Bidi+Xterm happen ?
From: Juliusz Chroboczek [EMAIL
Hi
I don't wish to open the discussion again. Please don't make it such.
I'm sticking to facts
On Mon, 25 Feb 2002, Akber Choudhry wrote:
Let's try to attempt to sum up the issues:
I believe that, as many people have pointed out, client-side bidi support
(X client or program vs. X server
On Mon, 25 Feb 2002, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
I don't wish to open the discussion again. Please don't make it such.
I'm sticking to facts
Kubota-san wants an open discussion, as do many people. Perhaps the
stifling technique is becoming less effective, as this has been defined as
an urgent and
On Sun, 24 Feb 2002, Nadav Har'El wrote:
On Sun, Feb 24, 2002, Roozbeh Pournader wrote about Re: [I18n]So, will Bidi+Xterm
happen ?:
1) Try to change FriBidi's license: very hard, because of code borrowing
from many different LGPL-ed projects. But most of the borrowed code is
copyright
On Sun, 24 Feb 2002, Behdad Esfahbod wrote:
But I'm a little confused, when roozbeh said about FSF codes, I
though that he means the autoconf and libtool stuff, but now you
say that xterm uses autoconf too, doesn't using autoconf and
libtool prevent it from being X compatible?
I was
Hi,
At Sun, 24 Feb 2002 11:14:43 -0800 (PST),
Nadim Shaikli wrote:
I think we're loosing focus again on this topic (note subject :-)
I imagine that people who are discussing about copyright problem
will naturally think Xterm should support Bidi in future. Imagine,
is it likely that a person
On Thu, 21 Feb 2002, Nadim Shaikli wrote:
Can we put all the technical issues on the table to have a go at it ?
There are certainly enough technically skilled people interested in making
this happen to where it just might become a reality given enough direction
from XFree proper on what is
Having read this widely popular thread :-) I'm still fuzzy about what
the consensus was (if any) and what is needed to make the inclusion of
Bidi into xterm a reality.
I would like to note that there have been a number of calls along the
lines of Bidi might/is difficult [in relation to terminal
13 matches
Mail list logo
