[BRLTTY] Braille tables versus contraction tables.

[Mario Lang]

Dave Mielke <dave at mielke.cc> writes:

> If we use contraction tables in place of the strictly one-to-one text tables, 
> what are your collective thoughts on the one major difference that contraction 
> table support splits braille windows on word boundaries whereas text table 
> support doesn't?

As stated earlier, I think the "one character per cell" idiom also
holds here.  If there are characters at position 40, I want to see them.
IIUC, splitting at word boundaries would mean (I never really
used contracted braille) that if a word doesnt fit at the end of
the display, it will not be displayed there.  I dont like this, not
at all.  We could probably invent an opcode to enable/disable this
behaviour per table?

-- 
CYa,
  ⡍⠁⠗⠊⠕ | Debian Developer <URL:http://debian.org/>
  .''`. | Get my public key via finger mlang/key at db.debian.org
 : :' : | 1024D/7FC1A0854909BCCDBE6C102DDFFC022A6B113E44
 `. `'
   `-      <URL:http://delysid.org/>  <URL:http://www.staff.tugraz.at/mlang/>