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: link appearance and soft face properties Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2005 15:01:20 -0700 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1119220230 3327 80.91.229.2 (19 Jun 2005 22:30:30 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2005 22:30:30 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Jun 20 00:30:27 2005 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Dk8Ii-0007bv-Pp for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 20 Jun 2005 00:30:01 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Dk8Oo-0001Or-VF for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 19 Jun 2005 18:36:18 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Dk8M3-0000kC-HS for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 19 Jun 2005 18:33:27 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Dk8Ly-0000ev-AB for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 19 Jun 2005 18:33:22 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Dk8Lp-0000Wu-Ba for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 19 Jun 2005 18:33:13 -0400 Original-Received: from [141.146.126.230] (helo=agminet03.oracle.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_3DES_EDE_CBC_SHA:24) (Exim 4.34) id 1Dk7tX-0002z4-IF for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 19 Jun 2005 18:03:59 -0400 Original-Received: from agminet03.oracle.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by agminet03.oracle.com (Switch-3.1.7/Switch-3.1.7) with ESMTP id j5JM1OUJ024153 for ; Sun, 19 Jun 2005 17:01:24 -0500 Original-Received: from rgmsgw301.us.oracle.com (rgmsgw301.us.oracle.com [138.1.186.50]) by agminet03.oracle.com (Switch-3.1.7/Switch-3.1.7) with ESMTP id j5JM1OMH024140 for ; Sun, 19 Jun 2005 17:01:24 -0500 Original-Received: from rgmsgw301.us.oracle.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rgmsgw301.us.oracle.com (Switch-3.1.4/Switch-3.1.0) with ESMTP id j5JM1NmF015999 for ; Sun, 19 Jun 2005 16:01:23 -0600 Original-Received: from dradamslap (dhcp-amer-whq-csvpn-gw3-141-144-80-223.vpn.oracle.com [141.144.80.223]) by rgmsgw301.us.oracle.com (Switch-3.1.4/Switch-3.1.0) with SMTP id j5JM1Ml1015994 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Sun, 19 Jun 2005 16:01:23 -0600 Original-To: X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 Importance: Normal X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAQAAAAI= X-Whitelist: TRUE 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:39130 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:39130 Hard: The appearance of a hard text property like :underline always means the same thing: the text is underlined. Users can decide to use it or not use it, but they cannot redefine it. This is a weird statement. What should people who listen to underlined text do? (They may want the underlined text to be different from the rest.) What should people who look at text, but for various reasons, use colors, never underlines or other such modifications. (Setting in their .emacs file.) I'm not sure what your point is. Is it my statement that you find weird or the fact that :underline is cast in concrete as underlining? Are you suggesting that text properties such as :underline should have or should allow an alternative interpretation for, for example, those with disabilities such as loss of sight? Are you suggesting that such text properties can already be used in this way? What is your point? If you are questioning whether such properties are really "hard" today, that is, whether they do not in fact allow for alternative display or interpretation as, say, sound, then I think the answer is "yes" - out of the box, Emacs does not allow for any alternative treatment for such properties: :underline always means "underline". The :underline text property simply determines whether or not the text in question is underlined. From Info: `:underline' Whether or not characters should be underlined, and in what color. If the value is `t', underlining uses the foreground color of the face. If the value is a string, underlining uses that color. The value `nil' means do not underline. Someone might, I suppose, write code to interpret :underline in some other way. That is not the point I was making by distinguishing "soft" from "hard" text properties. In particular, I wanted to distinguish link text from underlined text. Just because some text might be underlined does not make it a link. To be a link, it must behave as a link. I suggested we provide a way to make a portion of text appear as a link - in whatever way that appearance might be manifested. Being able to realize :underline text as text read aloud in a certain way would not help us with the problem of changing the representation of links, because not all :underline text is link text. The distinction of soft from hard that I was driving at is, as I mentioned, the difference between using Emphasis and Bold markup tags: Emphasis text is intended to be displayed in different ways, depending on the context; Bold text is not. It is the difference between software and hardware. Softer vs harder is essentially later vs earlier binding. Such a distinction is old - you can see it in the design, for instance, of Tex/LaTex. Maybe there is a better name for it than "soft vs hard" - I don't know.