From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Todays exercise of sanity (or does "see" really match "not"?) Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 11:07:07 +0100 Message-ID: References: <002301c52e18$c9b014a0$0200a8c0@sedrcw11488> <200503211349.j2LDnxX12741@raven.dms.auburn.edu> <003401c52e20$d6f79c70$0200a8c0@sedrcw11488> <87hdj4vppf.fsf@jurta.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1111575882 28460 80.91.229.2 (23 Mar 2005 11:04:42 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 11:04:42 +0000 (UTC) Cc: juri@jurta.org, lennart.borgman.073@student.lu.se, teirllm@dms.auburn.edu, rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Mar 23 12:04:41 2005 Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DE3f7-00036N-4I for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 23 Mar 2005 12:04:33 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DE3wb-0006Cb-2J for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 23 Mar 2005 06:22:37 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1DE34q-0004HH-RE for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 23 Mar 2005 05:27:06 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1DE34F-0004A8-5L for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 23 Mar 2005 05:26:33 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DE33L-0003ZC-Ni for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 23 Mar 2005 05:25:32 -0500 Original-Received: from [195.41.46.236] (helo=pfepb.post.tele.dk) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1DE2lE-0003yI-B9; Wed, 23 Mar 2005 05:06:48 -0500 Original-Received: from kfs-l.imdomain.dk.cua.dk (0x503e2644.bynxx3.adsl-dhcp.tele.dk [80.62.38.68]) by pfepb.post.tele.dk (Postfix) with SMTP id 8388F5EE06A; Wed, 23 Mar 2005 11:06:46 +0100 (CET) Original-To: David Kastrup In-Reply-To: (David Kastrup's message of "Wed, 23 Mar 2005 02:10:14 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org X-MailScanner-To: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:35030 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:35030 David Kastrup writes: > Richard Stallman writes: > >> It would be wrong for preview-latex, probably one of the most >> important applications extensively using the display property. >> >> With all due respect, I have not been shown a reason to consider >> that package tremendously important. All user program are important >> to some extent, but I don't see why this one should be overridingly >> so. > > Oh, I was not as immodest to claim one of the most important > applications whatsoever, but only among a particular subset. It > actually happens to be rather easy to be "one of the most important > applications [among those that are] _extensively_ using the display > property", since there are not many of them. The only other one I can > think of right now would be w3, and development of that appears pretty > much stagnant. I fully agree with David that we should not make such changes to the behaviour of the display property that would break _the_ major package actually using it for anything non-trivial. 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. 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? -- Kim F. Storm http://www.cua.dk