Hi Waleed, I think that the user needs to see the LRM in some way so that he can delete it if he wants to (and put it back afterwards if need be). It's not good to have something invisible that changes the display of the text so radically. As to the actual design of how to do this - that's best left up to professional interface desingers.
- yba On Thu, 14 Oct 2004, Waleed Hosny wrote: > Hi Jonathan & Meh, > > I do not think that we have to go into the complications of showing the > marker to keep the user experince as in MS. > > Regards, > Waleed > > Jonathan Ben Avraham wrote: > > >Hi Meh, > >The problem that I see with the underline indication, if I understand you > >correctly, is that the user does not see the actual character that is > >causing the underline. Now if you want to show *both* the LRM *and* > >underline the affected text *in the same color*, that's fine by me. > >Regards, > > > > - yba > > > > > >On Thu, 14 Oct 2004, Meh Lounge wrote: > > > > > > > >>I suggest that we will not tick the RLM itself but > >>instead, like in abiword, we will underline/tick the > >>text the RLM renders R2L. > >>--- Jonathan Ben Avraham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >>>Hi Frank, et al. > >>>I think that we have discussed this issue fairly > >>>thoroughly and > >>>understood the various directional control > >>>characters and their effects, > >>>and the IME issues. I think that there is also > >>>general agreement now (you, > >>>Waleed, Alan and myself at least) that we can > >>>proceed with the solution > >>>proposed in IZ 18024, without changing any OOo file > >>>format. All that is > >>>needed is a way to display the RLM (but not a tofu > >>>labeled with a hex > >>>code, please). > >>> > >>>If anyone has any stong objections (Ilya?) please > >>>post them now. > >>>Regards, > >>> > >>> - yba > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>On Thu, 14 Oct 2004, Frank Meies wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>>Hi, > >>>> > >>>>On 13.10.2004 20:18, meh wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>I actually find myself quit agreeing with you in > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>here, even though I am > >>> > >>> > >>>>>the original proposer of the idea. There isn't > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>much difference which > >>> > >>> > >>>>>exact sign will we implement the "f(x)" > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>sollution with, and Alan's > >>> > >>> > >>>>>sollutions seems to fit the standard. > >>>>>Why should it matter (implementation wise, and > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>tachles, for the user > >>> > >>> > >>>>>experience) whether we put an RLE or an LRM? > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>from the implementation point of view, it does > >>>> > >>>> > >>>matter, whether we use an > >>> > >>> > >>>>RLE or an LRM character. The LRM character could > >>>> > >>>> > >>>be automatically > >>> > >>> > >>>>inserted after typing the closing bracket, just as > >>>> > >>>> > >>>you described in > >>> > >>> > >>>>issue 18024. But where should an LRE character be > >>>> > >>>> > >>>inserted > >>> > >>> > >>>>automatically? The 'correct' position would be in > >>>> > >>>> > >>>front of the 'f', > >>> > >>> > >>>>since f(x) is the LTR embedded text portion. So > >>>> > >>>> > >>>this would be after the > >>> > >>> > >>>>last strong RTL character? No, automatic insertion > >>>> > >>>> > >>>of LRE/RLE/PDF > >>> > >>> > >>>>characters does not work without any additional > >>>> > >>>> > >>>information, where to > >>> > >>> > >>>>start and end the embedding. This again leads us > >>>> > >>>> > >>>to the IME/character > >>> > >>> > >>>>attribute solution. The IME gives the hint, where > >>>> > >>>> > >>>to start/end the > >>> > >>> > >>>>embedding, and internally using a > >>>> > >>>> > >>>direction/embedding character > >>> > >>> > >>>>attribute is totally equivalent to using > >>>> > >>>> > >>>LRE/RLE/PDF characters. So > >>> > >>> > >>>>actually Alan's solution is quite close to the > >>>> > >>>> > >>>IME/character attribute > >>> > >>> > >>>>option. > >>>>Beside this, the usage of LRE/RLE/PDF characters > >>>> > >>>> > >>>is 'considered not > >>> > >>> > >>>>suitable for use with markup in XML or HTML', see > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>http://www.unicode.org/unicode/reports/tr20/#Charlist > >> > >> > >>>>whereas the usage of RLM/LRM is suitable. That > >>>> > >>>> > >>>means, we should replace > >>> > >>> > >>>>these characters on xml/html export with the > >>>> > >>>> > >>>appropriate embedding > >>> > >>> > >>>>attributes. So we should prefer the > >>>> > >>>> > >>>embedding/direction attributes over > >>> > >>> > >>>>the embedding control characters, if want to have > >>>> > >>>> > >>>a solution based on > >>> > >>> > >>>>embedding markup. > >>>> > >>>>Regards, > >>>> > >>>>Frank > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>-- > >>> EE 77 7F 30 4A 64 2E C5 83 5F E7 49 A6 82 29 BA > >>>~. .~ Tk Open Systems > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>=}------------------------------------------------ooO--U--Ooo------------{= > >> > >> > >>> - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - tel: +972.2.679.5364, > >>>http://www.tkos.co.il - > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> > >>__________________________________ > >>Do you Yahoo!? > >>Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. > >>http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > -- EE 77 7F 30 4A 64 2E C5 83 5F E7 49 A6 82 29 BA ~. .~ Tk Open Systems =}------------------------------------------------ooO--U--Ooo------------{= - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - tel: +972.2.679.5364, http://www.tkos.co.il - ============================================================== To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe hebrew" in the message body.
