From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Lennart Borgman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs as word processor Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2013 17:43:40 +0100 Message-ID: References: <5288A59E.7030109@dancol.org> <87vbzqfgd6.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <87mwl04w3k.fsf@zigzag.favinet> <87iovo4caz.fsf@zigzag.favinet> <877gc14vzs.fsf@zigzag.favinet> <878uwhxnqe.fsf@informatimago.com> <83txf4cw9z.fsf@gnu.org> <528F77B8.9090602@lanl.gov> <83ob5ccoct.fsf@gnu.org> <83iovkcf1g.fsf@gnu.org> <83a9gvcyq3.fsf@gnu.org> <8361rjcf9u.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1385225053 26699 80.91.229.3 (23 Nov 2013 16:44:13 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2013 16:44:13 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Emacs-Devel devel , John Yates To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Nov 23 17:44:18 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1VkGJe-0002FX-AI for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 23 Nov 2013 17:44:18 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:44311 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VkGJd-0000b7-VY for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 23 Nov 2013 11:44:17 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:34978) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VkGJb-0000Y4-5E for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 23 Nov 2013 11:44:16 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VkGJZ-0002Y7-Hl for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 23 Nov 2013 11:44:15 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-we0-x230.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c03::230]:45102) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VkGJY-0002XY-5S; Sat, 23 Nov 2013 11:44:12 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-we0-f176.google.com with SMTP id t61so2272359wes.7 for ; Sat, 23 Nov 2013 08:44:10 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=ugMP3qLEL12O8kTb5XYjkYFJ8BA0TP3d9cH7EBYnVTg=; b=Yp/lqNqqe2n9eULQ42HfBBgV5oHS2+uULH00ZzS8MPhIL/rsMT42FIpjbM8XDp/MCX clpuNaNzEZvll9oBwT6Bcbg705/z+dRKh1RdFlORqqXoUzXlCah5zYfrXiZ/G2q4Jssq iPCOlR082/vqpaIIT5OWRgTVwOIsrTY4vuX645tu6X3iHYpOk0fLc2B7NV8MzaxpeFEv ka+21eaF2Q7pDTwVvG9j22SiMSf0B1iEuiv14Xu+UUOnk3JCAjdkdDEDIM2UbppeiT1W a7CwyN+jggcTcXILXHh9WYydY057ch0l+jtqjEu6WpmTkCcBDxyYuCXm+UILEGPsUT/k IgQw== X-Received: by 10.194.219.1 with SMTP id pk1mr15073592wjc.36.1385225050628; Sat, 23 Nov 2013 08:44:10 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: by 10.194.216.227 with HTTP; Sat, 23 Nov 2013 08:43:40 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <8361rjcf9u.fsf@gnu.org> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2a00:1450:400c:c03::230 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:165626 Archived-At: On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 4:24 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > That's unfair: you said nothing about those features in the text to > which I responded. You just talked about the difference between > imperative and declarative approaches to specifying attributes. Now > you've changed the subject, so I no longer understand what are we > discussing. > > If you are saying that these features don't exist in Emacs, I agree: > they don't. But I don't see the significance of that fact, since > everybody agrees that Emacs is not a WYSIWYG word processor at this > time. > > If you are saying that these features could never be part of a face > spec, then I don't think I agree; please explain why you think so. Styles may depend on the structure to. Compare the spec for CSS.