From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Koppelman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#13686: hi-yellow vs. hi-lock-1 Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 17:11:11 -0600 Message-ID: References: <878v6vidh7.fsf@gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1361920339 25187 80.91.229.3 (26 Feb 2013 23:12:19 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 23:12:19 +0000 (UTC) To: 13686@debbugs.gnu.org Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Feb 27 00:12:41 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1UAThR-000785-6M for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 00:12:41 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:50485 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UATh6-0005wX-8K for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 26 Feb 2013 18:12:20 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:44978) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UATh3-0005wD-7d for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 26 Feb 2013 18:12:18 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UATh0-0006bT-Ua for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 26 Feb 2013 18:12:17 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:46412) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UATh0-0006bJ-Or for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 26 Feb 2013 18:12:14 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1UATij-0000hg-Ie for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 26 Feb 2013 18:14:01 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org In-Reply-To: <878v6vidh7.fsf@gmail.com> Resent-From: David Koppelman Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 23:14:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 13686 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 13686-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B13686.13619203832619 (code B ref 13686); Tue, 26 Feb 2013 23:14:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 13686) by debbugs.gnu.org; 26 Feb 2013 23:13:03 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:51875 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1UAThm-0000gB-O9 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 26 Feb 2013 18:13:03 -0500 Original-Received: from ecelsrv1.ece.lsu.edu ([130.39.16.10]:49864) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1UAThj-0000fk-Cs for 13686@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 26 Feb 2013 18:13:01 -0500 Original-Received: from localhost (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by ecelsrv1.ece.lsu.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8AD8328091 for <13686@debbugs.gnu.org>; Tue, 26 Feb 2013 23:11:11 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ece.lsu.edu Original-Received: from ecelsrv1.ece.lsu.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (ecelsrv1.ece.lsu.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1k01YDWFGOpR for <13686@debbugs.gnu.org>; Tue, 26 Feb 2013 17:11:11 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: from sky.ece.lsu.edu (sky.ece.lsu.edu [130.39.96.14]) by ecelsrv1.ece.lsu.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CDDD28081 for <13686@debbugs.gnu.org>; Tue, 26 Feb 2013 17:11:11 -0600 (CST) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:71870 Archived-At: As the original developer of hi-lock and one willing to continue maintaining it, let me add my voice: I feel that a face name like hi-lock-1 would be much less useful, even if the name itself were rendered with the highlighting. The user's goal is to highlight something, currently the user can go through face choices until he or she finds a suitable color (if the first one does not satisfy). A cryptic name like hi-lock-1 just puts irrelevant information in front of the user, assuming the name is highlighted with the color. A name like font-lock-comment-face is semantic because it indicates the purpose of the face. The purpose of hi-yellow is to highlight something in yellow, so in that sense the name is semantic. If themers felt a strong need, we could make hi-lock-face-defaults themable so that hi-yellow and hi-green say, could be replaced with hi-golden-honey and hi-grassy-green. (Or the original face names with slightly different tints.)