From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Drew Adams" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: RE: Darkening font-lock colors Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 16:54:22 -0700 Message-ID: <5908857581A447C3865D9DD2BA70BA16@us.oracle.com> References: <87d47hoox5.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <87zlahrggt.fsf@cyd.mit.edu> <87tz0pg1uk.fsf@mail.jurta.org> <4A76481C.6000602@harpegolden.net> <87hbwp32ep.fsf@catnip.gol.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1249351812 21187 80.91.229.12 (4 Aug 2009 02:10:12 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 02:10:12 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 'David De La Harpe Golden' , 'Chong Yidong' , emacs-devel@gnu.org, 'Juri Linkov' , 'Dan Nicolaescu' , 'Stefan Monnier' , 'Miles Bader' To: "'Lennart Borgman'" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Aug 04 04:10:03 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1MY9TX-0003n2-C6 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 04 Aug 2009 04:10:03 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:32974 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MY9TW-0008BV-Mv for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 03 Aug 2009 22:10:02 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MY7MU-0000c8-AB for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 03 Aug 2009 19:54:38 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MY7MP-0000Sl-CB for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 03 Aug 2009 19:54:37 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=48051 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MY7MO-0000Rr-W1 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 03 Aug 2009 19:54:33 -0400 Original-Received: from acsinet11.oracle.com ([141.146.126.233]:62723) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MY7MM-0003Qn-7E; Mon, 03 Aug 2009 19:54:30 -0400 Original-Received: from acsinet15.oracle.com (acsinet15.oracle.com [141.146.126.227]) by acsinet11.oracle.com (Switch-3.3.1/Switch-3.3.1) with ESMTP id n73NsqlA002122 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 3 Aug 2009 23:54:53 GMT Original-Received: from abhmt003.oracle.com (abhmt003.oracle.com [141.146.116.12]) by acsinet15.oracle.com (Switch-3.3.1/Switch-3.3.1) with ESMTP id n73NslDn008776; Mon, 3 Aug 2009 23:54:47 GMT Original-Received: from dradamslap1 (/24.5.190.74) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Mon, 03 Aug 2009 16:54:24 -0700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: Thread-Index: AcoUjesOGIWAAkrtQ8qcMOCdFE7CzAABrsvw X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579 X-Source-IP: abhmt003.oracle.com [141.146.116.12] X-Auth-Type: Internal IP X-CT-RefId: str=0001.0A010205.4A7778B1.00A0:SCFSTAT5015188,ss=1,fgs=0 X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 1) 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 Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:113642 Archived-At: > Maybe, but a good default is also good to have. Yes, a _good_ default. My point was that if you start trading off between accessibility, usability, and who-knows-what-else, the result might not be so good. I certainly agree that themes are not the place to start, and that we should try for good defaults. You, not I, pointed out the conflicts between different sets of criteria. My point was that you will respect none of those sets if you try a half-way compromise (probably). > I think jumping into themes right away would just prevent > good defaults. Dunno if it would prevent anything, but I agree that good defaults come first. > > 2. FWIW, I am against having both foregrounds and > backgrounds defined for faces > > such as font-lock faces, that is, for the default values. > Distracting & ugly. > > I think it is helpful that makes for exampel comments stand out a bit > as I said because it holds those pieces of text together and a bit > apart from other text. This is the same use they often have in a web > page. We will agree to disagree. One person's stands-out-nicely is another person's annoying distraction. > However the color difference must be small otherwise the text with a > background color will perhaps stand out to much. I think there is a > balance between standing out too much or too little. > > In what way do you think it distracting? See above. > > Also, they look odd when over trailing whitespace. > > I see no visual problem there. Can you tell me what you see? It won't convince you, but even without trailing whitespace, I find large chunks of faces with fg and bg to look odd against the page background. It's like putting boxes around each line of text. If it looks good to you, fine. Just one opinion. A face that has the same background (i.e. no background) as the page looks like text on the page. A face that has no foreground looks like highlighting. Both are good. A face that has a foreground and a background that is different from the page looks like a boxed heading. And a chunk of such text doesn't look like a rectangular text box. It looks like a set of Lego blocks, with varying right edges due to different line lengths. FWIW.