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: text-texi - Node: Text Properties - After first paragraph Date: Tue, 4 Jul 2006 09:57:31 -0700 Message-ID: References: <44AA2F7B.4030004@easy-emacs.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1152032304 16779 80.91.229.2 (4 Jul 2006 16:58:24 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 4 Jul 2006 16:58:24 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Jul 04 18:58:23 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FxoE3-0005ar-L6 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 04 Jul 2006 18:58:15 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FxoE3-0000T4-5I for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 04 Jul 2006 12:58:15 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1FxoDZ-0000JB-5o for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 04 Jul 2006 12:57:45 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1FxoDX-0000IR-DS for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 04 Jul 2006 12:57:44 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FxoDX-0000IN-6F for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 04 Jul 2006 12:57:43 -0400 Original-Received: from [148.87.113.118] (helo=rgminet01.oracle.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_3DES_EDE_CBC_SHA:24) (Exim 4.52) id 1FxoRF-0007iv-6i for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 04 Jul 2006 13:11:53 -0400 Original-Received: from rgmsgw301.us.oracle.com (rgmsgw301.us.oracle.com [138.1.186.50]) by rgminet01.oracle.com (Switch-3.1.6/Switch-3.1.6) with ESMTP id k64GvdUK027459 for ; Tue, 4 Jul 2006 10:57:39 -0600 Original-Received: from dradamslap (dhcp-amer-csvpn-gw2-141-144-73-192.vpn.oracle.com [141.144.73.192]) by rgmsgw301.us.oracle.com (Switch-3.1.7/Switch-3.1.7) with SMTP id k64GvcAX031792 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 4 Jul 2006 10:57:39 -0600 Original-To: "emacs-devel" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <44AA2F7B.4030004@easy-emacs.de> Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1807 X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAQAAAAI= X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAQAAAAI= X-Whitelist: TRUE 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:56507 Archived-At: As users probably first encounter the terminus `face' in this context, it might be helpful to give just one sentence here concerning the relation between `properties' and `faces'. So I conceive properties as the most fundamental category, whereas faces are of higher order, a more combined and complex one. Right or wrong? I'm no expert on this - here is my understanding - There is a `face' text property and a `face' overlay property. Its value is one or more faces or a list of face attributes. So, you could say that a face is more fundamental than a text property, in that it can be used to define the value of a text `face' property (or an overlay `face' property, or even a text `mouse-face' property). However, you need not use a face to define a text `face' property - you can directly define the text `face' property using a face attribute list (not associated with any defined face). Also, text properties are not limited to the `face' property. In this sense, the notion of text property might be considered more fundamental, or at least more general, than the notion of face. It is probably more correct to start with face attributes as the basic building blocks. They are used to define faces or text `face' property values or overlay `face' property values. Faces can also be used to define both kinds of `face' property value. I don't think it is useful to consider either faces or text properties as more fundamental than the other. They are both users of face attributes. When faces are used to define the text `face' property value, they can be thought of as an intermediary - it is the attributes of the faces that really define the text property. In any case, these various critters need to be distinguished clearly in the doc: faces, text properties (including `face'), and overlay properties (including `face'). I imagine that they are, but I don't have time now to check. If these distinctions are not pointed out somewhere, then they should be. The notion of text property needs to pointed out in the Emacs manual also, because it is used in the UI. End users, not just Lisp programmers, need to be aware of the terminology (face, text property). I don't see the text you reference, however. In node (elisp) Text Properties I see no occurrence of either "face" or "Terminus". And I'm not sure we could (or should try to) convey the relation between faces and text properties in a single sentence.