From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Should invisible imply intangible? Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 03:58:26 -0700 (MST) Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: <200203131058.g2DAwQh05428@wijiji.santafe.edu> References: <200202232019.g1NKJoG14638@aztec.santafe.edu> <200202250510.g1P5A3714156@rum.cs.yale.edu> <200202262013.g1QKDef16683@aztec.santafe.edu> <200203010130.g211UDG05790@rum.cs.yale.edu> <200203031440.g23EeN200619@aztec.santafe.edu> <200203031711.g23HBI623254@rum.cs.yale.edu> <200203042341.g24NfiH00596@aztec.santafe.edu> <200203052158.g25Lw7A01243@wijiji.santafe.edu> <200203052304.g25N4pI03908@rum.cs.yale.edu> <200203092003.g29K3b303868@wijiji.santafe.edu> <200203092237.g29MbGf29464@rum.cs.yale.edu> <200203102132.g2ALWPK04119@wijiji.santafe.edu> <200203102202.g2AM26q06798@rum.cs.yale.edu> <200203111906.g2BJ6BY04591@wijiji.santafe.edu> <200203121756.g2CHuG514941@rum.cs.yale.edu> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1016017236 20447 80.91.224.249 (13 Mar 2002 11:00:36 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 11:00:36 +0000 (UTC) Cc: monnier+gnu/emacs@rum.cs.yale.edu, emacs-devel@gnu.org, David.Kastrup@t-online.de Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 16l6Ul-0005Jg-00 for ; Wed, 13 Mar 2002 12:00:35 +0100 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 16l6XM-0005Ko-00 for ; Wed, 13 Mar 2002 12:03:16 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 16l6UQ-0005WF-00; Wed, 13 Mar 2002 06:00:14 -0500 Original-Received: from pele.santafe.edu ([192.12.12.119]) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 16l6Si-00053s-00; Wed, 13 Mar 2002 05:58:28 -0500 Original-Received: from wijiji.santafe.edu (wijiji [192.12.12.5]) by pele.santafe.edu (8.11.6+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id g2DAwQa26324; Wed, 13 Mar 2002 03:58:26 -0700 (MST) Original-Received: (from rms@localhost) by wijiji.santafe.edu (8.11.6+Sun/8.9.3) id g2DAwQh05428; Wed, 13 Mar 2002 03:58:26 -0700 (MST) X-Authentication-Warning: wijiji.santafe.edu: rms set sender to rms@wijiji using -f Original-To: monnier+gnu/emacs@rum.cs.yale.edu In-Reply-To: <200203121756.g2CHuG514941@rum.cs.yale.edu> (monnier+gnu/emacs@rum.cs.yale.edu) Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.5 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:1900 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:1900 That much I know, but the problem is when there's some other property like a `display' property that ends up displaying something. If the text is invisible, it should not display *anything* no matter what other properties it has (including `display', `after-string' and `before-string'). An invisible piece of text should not contribute to the screen contents (except for the ellipsis, if any). It seems not since David uses display+invisible when replacing TeX source code with an image of the output in his preview-latex package (the `invisible' property seems useless at first, but he uses it so he can use the isearch-open-invisible hook). Isn't it the case that specifying an image with a property on some text replaces the text with the image? I think so. If that is so, I don't understand what purpose this invisible property is supposed to serve. Can you explain? I cannot figure out, from the mere reference to isearch-open-invisible, what he is trying to do. Anyway, it is clearly a bug if invisible fails to completely suppress the display of the text it covers. > The scenario is one where message header lines are marked as invisible > using overlays, the goal being to hide them. Any reason why those cannot explicitly use the `intangible' property ? Because the invisibility of these lines is controlled buffer-invisibility-spec, and that can't control the intangible property. This text is visible sometimes and invisible sometimes, and we want to change that *without* changing the text properties directly. The text should be intangible when it is invisible, and not when it is not. And none of that should require changing actual text properties. _______________________________________________ Emacs-devel mailing list Emacs-devel@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel