Page MenuHomePhabricator

Spurious direction marks in Special:Recentchanges
Closed, DeclinedPublic

Description

Author: angus

Description:
In Special:Recentchanges, right after the link to the article that changed,
there is either a LEFT-TO-RIGHT-MARK (U+200E) (for projects using ltr scripts)
or a RIGHT-TO-LEFT-MARK (U+200F) (rtl).

I propose these marks not to be output anymore. They are redundant and useless
(if they were added to counteract bug 3696, according to the last comment of
that bug, they aren't needed anymore), and they screw up w3m's output.

Thanks.


Version: unspecified
Severity: minor

Details

Reference
bz9197

Event Timeline

bzimport raised the priority of this task from to Lowest.Nov 21 2014, 9:39 PM
bzimport set Reference to bz9197.
bzimport added a subscriber: Unknown Object (MLST).

robchur wrote:

This is possibly a duplicate of either bug 7885 or bug 8996, but I'm not sure which.

ayg wrote:

Related to bug 7885 but not bug 8996. The LRM/RLM is needed because the closing
parenthesis is bidi-neutral, and so it's possible that bidi-strong characters
immediately preceding it can cause incorrect display if we don't explicitly mark
it as being of the same directionality as the display language. If the W3C
can't cope with Unicode standards, it should get its act together.

References:
http://unicode.org/reports/tr9/tr9-15.html
http://www.unicode.org/Public/UNIDATA/UnicodeData.txt:
0029;RIGHT PARENTHESIS;Pe;0;ON;;;;;Y;CLOSING PARENTHESIS;;;; ("other neutral"
bidi class)

angus wrote:

Aha. I understand. So it should probably be added before the summary's closing
parenthesis, too (now it appears only before the semicolon after the page
title), and not only in RC but on every listing (watchlist, contributions,
etc.). (I guess bug 6100 covers all this, so I'm not filling new duplicates ;)

Thanks.

rotemliss wrote:

The direction marks were added to fix Bug 5724. They also appear in the
Watchlist, and they may be needed also in the contributions page. They are not
needed in the end of the line in the regular lists since it won't break when
using lists, but it may be needed in the enhanced recent changes (or <div> tags
can be used instead). Bug 6100 is about a completely different issue.