I might not be understanding this correctly.... But based on the below
code, wouldn't we first need to do (require 'hi-lock) for the C-x w
bindings to work?

http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git/tree/lisp/hi-lock.el?h=emacs-25

Coincidentally, currently a parallel discussion is going on in another
emacs-devel thread if we should remove the C-x w prefix map associated to
hi-lock. Please check out that thread for the reasoning behind it.

--
Kaushal Modi
On Feb 5, 2016 6:34 AM, "Alan Mackenzie" <acm@muc.de> wrote:

> Hello, Eli.
>
> On Fri, Feb 05, 2016 at 01:19:13PM +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > > Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2016 10:37:44 +0000
> > > From: Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de>
> > >
> > > The traditional key bindings for hi-lock commands, beginning C-x w,
> have
> > > disappeared from the 25.1 global key map.  They have been replaced by
> > > bindings beginning M-s h.
>
> > That's not what I see here: when I turn on hi-lock-mode, the "C-x w"
> > bindings are shown in the output of "C-h b".
>
> > What exactly do you see that led you to the above conclusion?
>
> emacs -Q
>
> C-x w  (intending C-x w C-h) responds "C-x w is undefined".
>
> On the other hand,
> M-s h C-h displays the bindings in *Help*.
>
> That led me to believe the C-x h bindings had been removed.  It would
> appear there's a difference between how the C-x w bindings are set and
> how the M-s h bindings are set.
>
> --
> Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).
>
>