From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Kastrup Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Several suggestions for image support Date: 27 Apr 2004 00:50:15 +0200 Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <200404230033.JAA10583@etlken.m17n.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1083019934 14815 80.91.224.253 (26 Apr 2004 22:52:14 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2004 22:52:14 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Kenichi Handa , rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Tue Apr 27 00:52:04 2004 Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1BIExI-0004Cg-00 for ; Tue, 27 Apr 2004 00:52:04 +0200 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1BIExH-0001RH-00 for ; Tue, 27 Apr 2004 00:52:04 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1BIEws-0002fN-U6 for emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org; Mon, 26 Apr 2004 18:51:38 -0400 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.30) id 1BIEwK-0002bn-Rp for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 26 Apr 2004 18:51:04 -0400 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.30) id 1BIEvo-0001x8-Oa for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 26 Apr 2004 18:51:03 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1BIEvh-0001pL-WD for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 26 Apr 2004 18:50:26 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([127.0.0.1] helo=lola.goethe.zz) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1BIEtg-0000ra-0z; Mon, 26 Apr 2004 18:48:20 -0400 Original-To: storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) 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: 2.1.4 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:22200 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:22200 storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) writes: > I have just installed changes to revert to the 21.3 functionality for > newline height calculation, that is, use the current face font height > (by default). Is that really the 21.3 default? I am asking because I was of the impression that the line arrangement usually was fixed to the ascent/descent values of the default face, rather than the current face: namely that merely switching to a smaller font would not decrease the distance of lines unless you changed the frame's _default_ face. Or do we have different values for "height of newline" and "total height of line"? If so, how are they related? > Then I added a new line-height property on the newline with the > following values: > > nil -> use height of current face (the default) > t -> use default face height (as minimum height) > 0 -> use (don't increase) actual line height > N (integer > 0) -> use N pixels (as minimum height) > F (float > 0.0) -> use F * current face font height Is 0 a special case of N (use 0 pixels as minimum height)? If so, would it be the same as 0.0, too? >>From your pointing out the different cases, it would appear that they differ. I am trying to get a feel of things. > The line-spacing property now just specifies additional line-spacing > like the line-spacing variable and frame parameter. All in all, this behavior sounds much more consistent and free from unexpected sideeffects than the previous implementation. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum