Hi Alice, Many thanks! It seems to me the issue has to do with whether or not a line starts with a Hebrew or Latin character. By removing some text, the second line no longer starts with a Hebrew character, so the line is typeset left-to-right instead of right-to-left. But you probably figured that out already.
Anyway, the document looks good to me, I approve of publication. Kind regards, Martijn van Beurden Op di 17 dec 2024 om 23:07 schreef Alice Russo <aru...@amsl.com>: > > Martijn, > Thank you for pointing this out. This issue in the PDF has been corrected; > please see https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9639.pdf (page 62). > > The fix (to get the PDF to match the TXT and HTML) involved incrementally > updating the XML source file to pinpoint when the bug rears its head, and > then deleting the words "as follows" (this minor change is visible in the > last diff file, which shows only the most recent changes to the text file): > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9639-lastrfcdiff.html > > The files are here: (please refresh) > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9639.txt > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9639.pdf > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9639.html > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9639.xml > > All changes from the approved I-D: > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9639-diff.html > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9639-rfcdiff.html (side by side) > > Please confirm before we continue the publication process. For more > specificity, screenshots are available below. > > Thank you. > RFC Editor/ar > -- > > Before the fix (HTML vs. PDF - they do not match): > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9639_p62_before.png > > After the fix (HTML vs. PDF - they match): > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9639_p62_after.png > > > On Dec 12, 2024, at 7:00 AM, Martijn van Beurden <mva...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Hi Sandy, > > > > Looking it this one more time, it seems the PDF still doesnt render > > correctly. In the spelling out with all the code points, it seems the > > characters are spelled out right to left instead of left to right. The PDF > > differs from the HTML and TXT in this respect. > > > > The HTML says somelike like > > > > where in direction of reading, the sequence of characters forming the field > > content is as follows: character 1, character 2, character 3, character 4. > > > > The PDF says something like this: > > > > where in direction of reading, the sequence of characters forming the field > > content is as follows: character 3, character 2, character 1, character 4. > > > > This seems like a tooling issue. > > > > Kind regards, Martijn van Beurden > > > > Op do 12 dec 2024 08:43 schreef Martijn van Beurden <mva...@gmail.com>: > > Hi Sandy, > > > > This looks great, I approve. Many thanks for incorporating, and improving > > on, my suggestion. > > > > Kind regards, Martijn van Beurden > > > > > > Op do 12 dec 2024 00:36 schreef Sandy Ginoza <sgin...@amsl.com>: > > Hi Martijn, > > > > Thank you for your review. We have updated the document and posted the > > files here for your review: > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9639.xml > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9639.txt > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9639.pdf > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9639.html > > > > Diffs of most recent updates only: > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9639-lastdiff.html > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9639-lastrfcdiff.html > > > > AUTH48 diff: > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9639-auth48diff.html > > > > Comprehensive diffs: > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9639-diff.html > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9639-rfcdiff.html > > > > Please review and let us know if updates are needed or if you approve the > > RFC for publication. > > > > Thank you, > > RFC Editor/sg > > > > > > > > > On Dec 7, 2024, at 4:05 AM, Martijn van Beurden <mva...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > Op vr 6 dec 2024 om 22:33 schreef Sandy Ginoza <sgin...@amsl.com>: > > >> > > >> While troubleshooting, we were advised not to mix LTR and RTL scripts > > >> within the same <t> element and to include explanatory text that uses > > >> the <u> element. > > >> > > > > > > I can see why this is problematic. For that very same reason it is > > > very useful as an example of course. Thank you for taking the time to > > > address this. > > > > > >> > > >> We have updated the file to be more similar to RFC 9290 (which also uses > > >> “שלום") — "TITLE=שלום” now appears in artwork and is followed by the > > >> following explanatory text: > > >> > > >> where in direction of reading, the sequence of characters is: > > >> "ש" (HEBREW LETTER SHIN, U+05E9), "ל" (HEBREW LETTER LAMED, U+05DC), > > >> "ו" (HEBREW LETTER VAV, U+05D5), "ם" (HEBREW LETTER FINAL MEM, U+05DD). > > >> > > > > > > While this explains the part in Hebrew, it omits the Latin part. I > > > think this should be noted. I propose the following change > > > > > > OLD: > > > where in direction of reading, the sequence of characters is > > > > > > NEW: > > > where in direction of reading, the sequence of characters forming the > > > field content is > > > > > > I am not entirely sure whether 'forming the field content' is the best > > > possible phrasing here. Feel free to propose something else, I just > > > think that it is useful to mention that this 'spelling out' concerns > > > the field content, not the field name nor the separator (see section > > > 8.6 for details on these terms) > > > > > > I hope this proposal isn't too much trouble. > > > > > > Kind regards, > > > > > > Martijn van Beurden > > > > > > -- auth48archive mailing list -- auth48archive@rfc-editor.org To unsubscribe send an email to auth48archive-le...@rfc-editor.org
