From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Gtk scrollbar: thumb too short Date: 31 Mar 2003 13:04:15 +0200 Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Message-ID: <5xwuifg5lc.fsf@kfs2.cua.dk> References: <20030325193739.ZGIN3924.fep01-svc.swip.net@gaffa.gaia.swipnet.se> <1048780121.14517.22.camel@localhost.localdomain> <5xsmt7mt27.fsf@kfs2.cua.dk> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1049105261 2859 80.91.224.249 (31 Mar 2003 10:07:41 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 10:07:41 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Mon Mar 31 12:07:35 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 18zwCK-0000jW-00 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2003 12:07:24 +0200 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 18zwG5-0002ew-00 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2003 12:11:17 +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 18zwCH-00074X-08 for emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org; Mon, 31 Mar 2003 05:07:21 -0500 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.10.13) id 18zwBn-0006am-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 31 Mar 2003 05:06:51 -0500 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.10.13) id 18zwBJ-00060J-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 31 Mar 2003 05:06:22 -0500 Original-Received: from mail.filanet.dk ([195.215.206.179]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10.13) id 18zwAW-0005NF-00; Mon, 31 Mar 2003 05:05:32 -0500 Original-Received: from kfs2.cua.dk.cua.dk (kfs2.local.filanet.dk [192.168.1.182]) by mail.filanet.dk (Postfix) with SMTP id 8AD397C012; Mon, 31 Mar 2003 12:05:28 +0200 (CEST) Original-To: Miles Bader In-Reply-To: Original-Lines: 39 User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3.50 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:12760 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:12760 Miles Bader writes: > storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) writes: > > > [The fringe glyph for this is rather ugly though; it should really be > > > something a bit less visually prominent...] > > > > Are you talking about the 21.2 fringe glyph (a block) or the new glyph > > in CVS head (small dashes) ? > > The `small dashes' glyph. > > > What kind of glyph do you suggest? > > Just something a bit less visually dominant -- the dashes seem better > than the blocks, but because there are very many densely spaced dashes, > they still are quite distracting. Personally, I don't think I will find your suggestion less distracting, and I don't think it will be easy to find something which will please everyone. I would guess that people will fall into three categories: - those who WANT the empty line glyph to be very VISIBLE, - those who want it to be BARELY visible. - those who don't want the glyph at all (the default behaviour). I think it will be impossible to find a glyph which pleases both the first and second group... > > [Note that I use a white foreground on a dark background, which might > influence this somewhat] I still think it will be be best option to make the fringe glyphs configurable... -- Kim F. Storm http://www.cua.dk