2014-04-24 16:39 GMT+02:00 Eli Zaretskii <e...@gnu.org>: > In addition, assuming that by "guillemets" Philippe means U+00AB and > U+00BB,
"guillemet" is THE correct name, even in English. "guillemot" comes from an old typo error. If you don't want this term in Engmish you can still use "double angle bracket" which is unnecessarily long. > they cannot possibly form a bracketed pair, because their > General Category is not Ps and Pe. For that reason, you will never > find them in BidiBrackets.txt. > Forget the general category, we know that it does not solve any internationalization issue correctly. All past versions of Unicode algorthms that initially attempted to use them now use them only as informative rules (which are not stabilized) to help generate new "derived" properties (which should be used verbatim from the content of the UCD, because rapidly new exceptions are added to the rules). The guillemet evidently form a pair even if their use depends on languages which may swap their role (and this is the main reason why they are not assigned Ps and Pe because Ps and Pe will be swapped. They are still a pair which works even better than """ that can be paired in 3 different ways and not just two (meaning that you don't know which one to look for. Also read my exampel for what it is saying explicitly; a demonstration of the problem; just an example (there are many other similar example for such cases where nesting is not hierarchical but still maintains pairs). So nothing (at least not the reason of the GC which is just an intermediate but incomplete helper) forbids the guillemets to be listed in BidiBrackets.txt.
_______________________________________________ Unicode mailing list Unicode@unicode.org http://unicode.org/mailman/listinfo/unicode