On Mon, 4 Feb 2002, John Cowan wrote: > Gaspar Sinai scripsit: > > Now the exact same file is viewed with two different viewers > > at the bottom of this page: > > > > http://www.yudit.org/security/ > > Outlook Express, at least the version you are using, has a bug; > it is failing to set the overall directionality to RTL even > though the first character is strongly RTL. The fact that > some implementations are buggy is hardly an argument against > either the use of bidi or Unicode.
I am sorry but someone on this list has just said: +---------------------------------------------------- |The bidi algorithm is anything but vague. Any |implementation can be rigorously tested against two |reference implementations, to ensure fully compatible |implementation. +---------------------------------------------------- So does this mean that Microsoft does not rigorously test their products? Or does this mean the test is wrong? Or maybe the algorithm is vague? I expect at least one yes answer here. Come on guys this is only *one* example. And it happened in MS outlook too. (No more screenshots please none of my friends use that product any more). I am ready to publish regularily bad rendering of the *buggy* implementations of the non-vague unicode BIDI (or the non-buggy implementations of the *vague* BIDI - take your choice). I wonder which cost more to regualrily patch and change products or to change the standard and use a reversable bidi. It may take some time to find the bug - but the bug will be there... Cheers gaspar
