Guenter Milde wrote:
> I see, so we actually have
>
> (siht) for Arabic (babel & polyglossia) and Hebrew (polyglossia)
>
> as well as for Arabic and Hebrew in OpenOffice etc.
>
> )siht( for Hebrew (babel)
Yes. In the LyX source file, that is. In the LyX workarea, we have (siht) in
all cases.
The main difference, from a user POV, is that in Arabic you have to press ')'
for an opening bracket (to get ')' in the LyX window), while in Hebrew you
have to press '('. This has been the case since support for these languages
was introduced. I find this also irritating, but maybe these are simply
different input conventions, logical versus visual (I have added a FIXME that
requests clarification).
As far as pating is concerned, your should always get (siht) (in the LyX
window) when you paste (siht). I have not tested this, but the patch also does
not change this.
> I would prefer if the LyX input were "(siht)" for both, Hebrew and
> Arabic, regardless of the language package.
Me, too. But then, I'm neither a Hebrew nor an Arabic writer.
> The patch changes the output, i.e. if someone uses the input convention
> used in other Unicode editors and also in Arabic, the output will be wrong
> with LyX.
I don't think this is true.
> In this sense, it changes which input is required to get the correct output:
>
> * You will get the correct output with polyglossia for documents intended
> for Hebrew (babel).
>
> * You will get the wrong output with polyglossia for existing documents that
> used to work with Hebrew (polyglossia).
>
> * You will get the wrong output with polyglossia for text inserted from
> OpenOffice or similar sources.
Can you provide an example?
Jürgen
