Re: Todays exercise of sanity (or does "see" really match "not"?)

[Juri Linkov <juri@jurta.org>]

storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) writes:
> Instead we can explicitly put an inivisible property together with the
> display property on a priece of "hidden" text which should be ignored
> by searches.  That need a little work to check all uses of display
> properties, but it doesn't break any old code relying on the current
> behaviour.

Yes, there are existing packages where finding the underlying text
might be useful.  For example, in w3m images are placed over the text
extracted from the ALT="" image HTML attribute.  Finding it with isearch
seems useful.

> I don't know whether it actually works to put both invisible and
> display on some text (with the effect of showing the image and
> ignoring the under-laying text).  Would someone make some examples
> to check it?

The `display' property takes precedence over the `invisible' property:

(progn
  (goto-char (point-min))
  (insert "abcdefghi\n")
  (add-text-properties (- (point) 9) (- (point) 2)
   `(display ,(create-image (expand-file-name "gnu.xpm" data-directory) 'xpm)
     invisible t))
  (goto-char (point-min))
  (search-forward "def"))

And the image is visible.  Incremental search skips the underlying text,
but low-level search functions find it.

-- 
Juri Linkov
http://www.jurta.org/emacs/