Your message
To: Unicode List
Cc: Unicode List; 'Michael Everson'
Subject: RE: Unicode editing (RE: Unicode complaints)
Sent: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 06:28:44 -0800
did not reach the following recipient(s):
[EMAIL PROTECTED] on Tue, 20 Mar 2001 13:08:01 -0800
The e-mail address could not be found. Perhaps the recipient moved
to a different e-mail organization, or there was a mistake in the
address. Check the address and try again.The MTS-ID of the original
message is:c=US;a=MCI;p=msft;l={6B61ADAB-40-010320210801Z-12629
MSEXCH:MSExchangeMTA:northamerica:RED-MSG-07
-- Attached file included as plaintext by Listar --
Original-Envelope-ID: c=US;a=MCI;p=msft;l={6B61ADAB-40-010320210801Z-12629
Reporting-MTA: dns; red-msg-07.redmond.corp.microsoft.com
Final-Recipient: RFC822; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Action: failed
Status: 5.1.2
X-Supplementary-Info: MSEXCH:MSExchangeMTA:northamerica:RED-MSG-07
-- Attached file included as plaintext by Listar --
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.4418.65
Received: from inet-imc-04.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ([157.54.7.67]) by
red-msg-07.redmond.corp.microsoft.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.1600); Tue, 20
Mar 2001 07:03:31 -0800
Received: from mail4.microsoft.com ([157.54.6.183]) by
inet-imc-04.redmond.corp.microsoft.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.2883); Tue, 20
Mar 2001 07:03:29 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Received: from 17.254.0.82 by mail4.microsoft.com (InterScan E-Mail VirusWall NT);
Tue, 20 Mar 2001 07:03:23 -0800 (Pacific Standard Time)
Received: from unicode.org (unicode2.apple.com [17.254.3.212]) by bz2.apple.com
(8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id HAA03964; Tue, 20 Mar 2001 07:01:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from agent@localhost) by unicode.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id GAA22466; Tue, 20
Mar 2001 06:28:58 -0800 (GMT-0800)
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Subject: RE: Unicode editing (RE: Unicode complaints)
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 06:28:44 -0800
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: Unicode editing (RE: Unicode complaints)
Thread-Index: AcCxgdh3XD2G70CjRm60oKcs5o4lSg==
From: "Roozbeh Pournader" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Unicode List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Unicode List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Michael Everson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Tue, 20 Mar 2001, Marco Cimarosti wrote:
> Hmmm... I would say that my "WYSIWYG Unicode", or any other similar
display
> format, is not fit for doing searching, sorting, spell checking, etc.
>=20
> For all these kinds of things I would convert text back to "proper
Unicode"
> and go with standard algorithms.
If it were me, I would keep two copies who update each other when that's
needed. Or perhaps we should only keep the active paragraph in your
WYSIWYG format?
> > Ouch, something came to my mind just now: future versions of=20
> > Unicode may consider some meaning for new things, [...]
>=20
> And any visual layer like the one I was wondering about would fail to
> implement them until it is updated to do so.
>=20
> Generally, nobody will ever be able to come up with a piece of
software that
> automatically upgrades itself to new standards.
I was talking about something else: we are not allowed to remove
anything
from a file we're playing with, or we will become non-conformant. An old
editor that changes Lam+ZWJ+ZWNJ+ZWJ+Alef to Lam+Alef, simply because it
sees that they don't make any sense here will is non-conformant. And
standards people would say that they've warned us: You should keep the
code points intact, unless specifically asked by the user. So you should
keep everything you don't know about, including the information for
adjacent bidi runs with the same level: the next version may assign some
meaning to them, and you will become non-conformant as soon as that
version is out. (Or possibly I haven't got the conformance idea yet...)
