Andrew C. West scripsit: > > A page that contained both Mongolian and vertical CJK might require > > a vertical bidirectional algorithm, but AFAIK that question has not > > yet arisen. > > I'm a little confused by the last sentence.
So was I. > In bilingual Manchu-Chinese texts, which were common during > the Manchu Qing dynasty [1644-1911], the text normally follows the Manchu page > layout, with vertical lines of Manchu and Chinese interleaved from left to right > across the page, so that from a Chinese perspective the book reads backwards. Most interesting. What about codex binding? When I see people reading Chinese newspapers on the subway, the binding appears to be on the left even though the columns of the text are RTL; at least, judging by what appears to be the front page. (ObJoke: A reporter for the New York Yiddish newspaper, the _Forvits_: "Chief? Shpeisel here. I've got a story that'll rip this town wide open. Hold the back page!") > As I suggested in a recent thread on mixed horizontal/vertical layout, if you > did have mixed Top-To-Bottom (TTB) and Bottom-To-Top (BTT) scripts such as > Mongolian and Ogham [...] then you > could deal with their conflicting directionality as if they were rotated LTR and > RTL scripts by means of LRO, RLO and PDF control codes [202C..202D]. Surely that's not enough: you'd need to implement the full implicit bidi algorithm, giving Ogham a nonce bidi type of R. Either that, or run the Ogham T2B instead of the normal direction. -- Long-short-short, long-short-short / Dactyls in dimeter, Verse form with choriambs / (Masculine rhyme): [EMAIL PROTECTED] One sentence (two stanzas) / Hexasyllabically http://www.reutershealth.com Challenges poets who / Don't have the time. --robison who's at texas dot net
