From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Kevin Rodgers Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: NEWS and invisible text Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 17:09:16 -0600 Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Message-ID: <3E9B3F9C.2060900@yahoo.com> References: <200304111308.h3BD8oW03188@eel.dms.auburn.edu> <844r55f7yr.fsf@lucy.is.informatik.uni-duisburg.de> <200304111909.h3BJ9fOv010480@rum.cs.yale.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1050362046 9042 80.91.224.249 (14 Apr 2003 23:14:06 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 23:14:06 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Tue Apr 15 01:14:05 2003 Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 195D9J-0002Lh-00 for ; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 01:14:05 +0200 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 195DAt-0001Eh-00 for ; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 01:15:43 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10.13) id 195D8j-0006Qm-02 for emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org; Mon, 14 Apr 2003 19:13:29 -0400 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.10.13) id 195D71-0005iR-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 14 Apr 2003 19:11:43 -0400 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.10.13) id 195D5Z-0005D5-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 14 Apr 2003 19:10:15 -0400 Original-Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.224.249]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10.13) id 195D4f-0004rv-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 14 Apr 2003 19:09:18 -0400 Original-Received: from list by main.gmane.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 195D3z-00023X-00 for ; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 01:08:35 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-Received: from news by main.gmane.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 195D3y-00023O-00 for ; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 01:08:34 +0200 Original-Lines: 23 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; SunOS i86pc; en-US; rv:0.9.4.1) Gecko/20020406 Netscape6/6.2.2 X-Accept-Language: en-us X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1b5 Precedence: list List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:13231 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:13231 Stefan Monnier wrote: > The NEWS file says: > > ** Only one of the beginning or end of an invisible, intangible region is > considered an acceptable value for point; which one is determined by > examining how the invisible/intangible properties are inherited when new > text is inserted adjacent to them. Is that determined by examining the front-sticky and rear-sticky properties? > If text inserted at the beginning would > inherit the invisible/intangible properties, then that position is > considered unacceptable, and point is forced to the position following the > invisible/intangible text. If text inserted at the end would inherit the > properties, then the opposite happens. What happens when both conditions are true? -- Kevin Rodgers