Bidi - will it happen ?

On Tue, 11 Jun 2002 08:39:23 +0300 (IDT),
  Eli Zaretskii eliz <at> is.elta.co.il wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 10 Jun 2002, Moe Elzubeir wrote:
> > So I take it we are at square 0 ?
> 
> Not exactly, but close.
> 
> > I mean, where do I look to see exactly
> > what needs to be implemented and what the agreed upon
> > approach(es) if any.
> 
> You can look in the archives of this mailing list.

I'm at a loss here, why is it that qemacs

  http://fabrice.bellard.free.fr/qemacs

has been able to include bidi where-as emacs hasn't ?
Mind you I haven't been able to compile the package
(to verify for myself), but his claims still stand.

I know nothing of lisp (let alone elisp), but can't
the inclusion of fribidi (fribidi.sf.net) be
incorporated somehow into the emacs code even as an
external call for the time being (irrespective of
inefficiency, ugliness, etc - given the user opts for
its inclusion) ?

There is a major disconnect on this topic if one were
to do any research on it (emacs+bidi that this) on
google or anywhere else.  m17n.org had claimed that 
bidi is close at hand (through its various symposiums).
Can't the various interests (m17n, emacs, xemacs, utf2000,
etc) unite and have one highly concentrated effort to get
this done with ?  Bidi's status is very nebulous at best.

Can we start anew with clear indications of what has
or hasn't been done and what is needed to complete the
job (along with looking into what qemacs has done, again
as a starting point at least; certainly its author wouldn't
mind incorporating his additions into the main branch if
deemed useful).

 .tf.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com