From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz@is.elta.co.il>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel
Subject: Re: minibuffer vs dialog-boxes
Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2002 14:48:59 +0300
Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org
Message-ID: <9003-Sat20Apr2002144859+0300-eliz@is.elta.co.il>
References: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1020418192257.8613H-100000@is> <m3vgamojj7.fsf@Janik.cz>
Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@is.elta.co.il>
NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org
X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1019304027 5110 127.0.0.1 (20 Apr 2002 12:00:27 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2002 12:00:27 +0000 (UTC)
Cc: monnier+gnu/emacs@RUM.cs.yale.edu, emacs-devel@gnu.org
Return-path: <emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org>
Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244])
	by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian))
	id 16ytXW-0001KJ-00
	for <emacs-devel@main.gmane.org>; Sat, 20 Apr 2002 14:00:26 +0200
Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164])
	by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian))
	id 16ytrM-0004s1-00
	for <emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org>; Sat, 20 Apr 2002 14:20:56 +0200
Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org)
	by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian))
	id 16ytXL-0007Dm-00; Sat, 20 Apr 2002 08:00:15 -0400
Original-Received: from frigg.inter.net.il ([192.114.186.16])
	by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian))
	id 16ytWS-0007Ac-00
	for <emacs-devel@gnu.org>; Sat, 20 Apr 2002 07:59:20 -0400
Original-Received: from zaretsky ([80.230.2.40])
	by frigg.inter.net.il (Mirapoint Messaging Server MOS 2.9.3.2)
	with ESMTP id BIO24074;
	Sat, 20 Apr 2002 14:58:36 +0300 (IDT)
Original-To: Pavel@Janik.cz
X-Mailer: emacs 21.2.50 (via feedmail 8 I) and Blat ver 1.8.9
In-Reply-To: <m3vgamojj7.fsf@Janik.cz> (Pavel@Janik.cz)
Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org
X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.9
Precedence: bulk
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-devel@gnu.org>
List-Subscribe: <http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
List-Id: Emacs development discussions. <emacs-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mail.gnu.org/pipermail/emacs-devel/>
Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:2831
X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:2831

> From: Pavel@Janik.cz (Pavel =?iso-8859-2?q?Jan=EDk?=)
> Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2002 10:34:36 +0200
> 
>    > Shouldn't some ingenious use of minibuffer-prompt-face be enough?
> 
> Some days ago I proposed changing the background color of the whole
> minibuffer. Minibuffer-prompt-face is not enough I think. Prompt can be
> short (like I-search:) and thus it is not enough to get user' attention.

Note the ``ingenious'' part: we could do something with the face that
it will draw the attention immediately.

> Changing the background color of minibuffer will be similar to the effect
> of mode-line-inactive face.

Won't a suitable definition of the minibuffer face have the same
effect?