Ken, Aha! Embarrassed to admit I completely missed that as I was considering reordering in a later stage. Looks like an easy fix, thanks so much for the help,
Loren On Oct 18, 2013, at 2:37 PM, "Whistler, Ken" <ken.whist...@sap.com> wrote: > Loren, > > Your implementation is fine through [Resolving_Implicit_Levels]. And rule I1 > *does* set > the embedding level of the 0009 from 0 to 1. > > What you are missing it that rule L1 then *re*sets the level of 0009 back to > the > paragraph embedding level, i.e. 0. And that is how you get the expected > result. > > Here is the relevant portion of the corresponding trace output from the > bidiref > implementation. > > HTH, > > --Ken > > Trace: Entering br_UBA_ResolveNeutralsByLevel [N2] > Current State: 16 > Text: 0661 0009 0028 0662 0029 > Bidi_Class: AN R R AN R > Levels: 0 0 0 0 0 > Runs: <L--------------------L> > > Trace: Entering br_UBA_ResolveImplicitLevels [I1, I2] > Current State: 17 > Text: 0661 0009 0028 0662 0029 > Bidi_Class: AN R R AN R > Levels: 2 1 1 2 1 > Runs: <L--------------------L> > > Trace: Entering br_UBA63_ResetWhitespaceLevels [L1] > Current State: 18 > Text: 0661 0009 0028 0662 0029 > Bidi_Class: AN R R AN R > Levels: 2 0 1 2 1 > Runs: <L--------------------L> > > > > From: unicode-bou...@unicode.org [mailto:unicode-bou...@unicode.org] On > Behalf Of Loren Brichter > Sent: Friday, October 18, 2013 9:09 AM > To: unicode@unicode.org > Subject: 6.3.0 Bidi implementation snag > > I'm finishing up an implementation of the 6.3.0 Bidi algorithm and hit a > snag: currently passing all tests but one. > > After much careful re-re-reading of the spec, I can't quite figure out where > this thing is going wrong and would really appreciate some advice, or perhaps > someone who knows that this test case is in fact incorrect (unlikely as that > may be). > > The particular test case is this: > 0661 0009 0028 0662 0029;2;0;2 0 1 2 1;0 1 4 3 2 > (line 184 of BidiCharacterTest.txt) > > The "correct" levels are [2 0 1 2 1], however, this implementation resolved > the levels to be [2 1 1 2 1]. A single incorrect level for the Segment > Separator at index 1. > > Below is a trace of the algorithm (apologies if this is not visible on your > end in a monospaced font, it is much more readable that way). In stage [N1] > the S at index 1 becomes R. This seems correct to me because the previous > character at index 0 is AN (interpreted as R according to the spec) and the > following character at index 2 is an R. Both preceding and following > characters are the same direction, so the S becomes an R as well. > > At stage [Resolving_Implicit_Levels], the R (previously S) at index 1 has an > even level (0), so its level is increased by one (0->1). I'm not entirely > sure why the test has the level staying at 0, unless I missed something else > completely unrelated to these two stages mentioned. > > Any advice would be greatly appreciated, thanks very much! > > Loren > > [Resolving_Neutral_and_Isolate_Formatting_Types] > matching: - - 4 - - > bidiclass: AN R R AN R > embedding: 0 0 0 0 0 > > [Resolving_Implicit_Levels] > matching: - - 4 - - > bidiclass: AN R R AN R > embedding: 2 1 1 2 1 >
