Re: [office] Bi-directional text.

[Lars Oppermann <Lars.Oppermann@Sun.COM>]

Regarding the Egyptian comments, there were three points:
1. text orientation and writing direction
2. digits from different scripts
3. calendars

Ad 1, I believe we have covered this and I am currently of the optinion 
that the combination of directional attributes in OpenDocument, the 
unicode bidi algorithm and unicode-15.2 direction marks and signs give 
us coverage of what is required.

Ad 2, any digits that have an unicode code point can be entered into an 
OpenDocument document. Detecting the appropriate script and converting 
digits while they are entered is an application feature and cannot be 
handled by the format. As far as sorted/numbered lists are concerned, 
the specification provides for a generic mechanism to specify the 
applicable numbering format. See 12.2.2 in the OpenDocument 
specification. Only "1, 2, 3...", "I, II, III...", and "i, ii, iii" are 
explicitly mentioned in the spec, but the schema allows for a generic 
string here. OpenOffice.org for instance uses this to allow numberings 
according to all supported locales (including Asian and Arabic ones).

Ad 3, support for different calendar systems is described in 14.7.11: 
Calendar System. The Hijri calendar is explicitly mentioned there as a 
possibility. However, arbitrary strings are possible, should an 
application wish to support other calendar systems...


Patrick Durusau wrote:
> Daniel,
> 
> If it would not be too much extra work, could you also write an 
> explanation with specific reference to the comments from the Egyptian 
> National Body that accompanied their yes vote on ODF? Thinking that the 
> general explanation is a great idea but in this context, answering the 
> specific cases that they pose would also be quite useful. We can 
> incorporate that into a disposition of the comment.
> 
> We also need to consider how to response to the comments from the 
> Israeli National Body and the UK.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Hope you are having a great day!
> 
> Patrick
> 
> Daniel Carrera wrote:
> 
>> Lars Oppermann wrote:
>> [snip]
>>
>>> This base direction can then be used in conjunction with the unicode 
>>> bidi-algorithm (http://www.unicode.org/unicode/reports/tr9/) and the 
>>> marks/signs from unicode-15.2 in order to display the content correctly.
>>
>>
>> I see. Thanks for the explanation.
>>
>> I think it would help if the OpenDocument spec had a non-normative 
>> appendix explaining which features provide bidi support. It'd be 
>> essentially what you just wrote on your email. And we could do the 
>> same for accessibility, and for any other issue that comes up in the 
>> future.
>>
>>> I think that the problem might be due to the fact, that a) there is 
>>> no explicit section in OpenDocument describing all bidi functions and 
>>> b) the functionality is a combinations of attributes defined in 
>>> OpenDocument and mechanisms specified in unicode. It's hard to keep 
>>> track of things that way. Maybe a set of examples and their 
>>> appropriate coding in OpenDocument would be a useful resource for 
>>> implementors as well as evaluators of the OpenDocument standard. Any 
>>> volunteers?
>>
>>
>> I'll volunteer to write a short appendix. It'll be mostly just copy 
>> and paste from your email.
>>
>> Best,
>> Daniel.
> 
>