[Standards] Council Minutes 2020-05-27

Marvin W xmpp at larma.de
Tue Jun 2 20:17:03 UTC 2020


1. I don't think we should add new rules, especially none that are hard
to implement - and most people (and also many programming languages)
have trouble with unicode, so I'd qualify this as hard to implement.
2. I also disagree that category C characters should not be allowed to
appear after the opening directive. An example where I think there is
valid use to put it after the opening directive are LRO/RLO.
3. After checking again the definition, I disagree that WORD JOINER is a
good way to indicate no formatting should happen: "The function of
character is to indicate that line breaks are not allowed between the
adjoining characters, except next to hard line breaks." Thus, if this
character is put behind a space, it stops line breaks from happening at
that space which would normally happen, and I don't think that's what
people wanted.

Solution could be:
- If a space, the start of the string or a newline precedes the opening
directive, it can be disabled by prefixing it with U+200B
- If another opening directive precedes the opening directive, it can be
disabled by prefixing it with U+2060

Both are not sane solutions and I wasn't actually very serious when
mentioning it. So maybe it's not a good idea to mention it in the XEP
even though it technically works.


On 02.06.20 19:45, Sam Whited wrote:
> Drat, you're right, I thought it was in category Z but it doesn't look
> like it is.
> Sticking it before the directive would work as well. Alternatively we
> could expand the definition of what's not allowed immediately after a
> thing that might be a styling directive to include category C as well as
> category Z. It would make sense to me that they're not allowed either,
> and it means word joiner can be used as written.
> I have no particular preference either way, but if anyone else sees a
> flaw with either solution that I'm missing let me know.
> Thanks,
> Sam

More information about the Standards mailing list