From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/59080 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Katsumi Yamaoka Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: asterisks disappear Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 09:16:35 +0900 Organization: Emacsen advocacy group Message-ID: References: <87sm7ojvra.fsf@enki.rimspace.net> <874qk2dix8.fsf@tc-1-100.kawasaki.gol.ne.jp> <87vfchcmrj.fsf@tc-1-100.kawasaki.gol.ne.jp> <4nis8gfvr7.fsf@lifelogs.com> <87zn1sldkv.fsf@tc-1-100.kawasaki.gol.ne.jp> <87oei8kl0m.fsf@tc-1-100.kawasaki.gol.ne.jp> NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1099959514 24188 80.91.229.6 (9 Nov 2004 00:18:34 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 00:18:34 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: ding-owner+M7620@lists.math.uh.edu Tue Nov 09 01:18:20 2004 Return-path: Original-Received: from malifon.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.13] ident=mail) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1CRJiG-00051P-00 for ; Tue, 09 Nov 2004 01:18:20 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.math.uh.edu ident=lists) by malifon.math.uh.edu with smtp (Exim 3.20 #1) id 1CRJgu-0000s1-00; Mon, 08 Nov 2004 18:16:56 -0600 Original-Received: from util2.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.23]) by malifon.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 3.20 #1) id 1CRJgm-0000rv-00 for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Mon, 08 Nov 2004 18:16:48 -0600 Original-Received: from justine.libertine.org ([66.139.78.221] ident=postfix) by util2.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1CRJgh-0005qB-I8 for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Mon, 08 Nov 2004 18:16:43 -0600 Original-Received: from washington.hostforweb.net (washington.hostforweb.net [69.61.11.2]) by justine.libertine.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD0883A0014 for ; Mon, 8 Nov 2004 18:16:42 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) by washington.hostforweb.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.42) id 1CRJgj-0002v9-N2 for ding@gnus.org; Mon, 08 Nov 2004 19:16:45 -0500 Original-To: ding@gnus.org X-Face: #kKnN,xUnmKia.'[pp`;Omh}odZK)?7wQSl"4o04=EixTF+V[""w~iNbM9ZL+.b*_CxUmFk B#Fu[*?MZZH@IkN:!"\w%I_zt>[$nm7nQosZ<3eu;B:$Q_:p!',P.c0-_Cy[dz4oIpw0ESA^D*1Lw= L&i*6&( User-Agent: Gnus/5.110003 (No Gnus v0.3) Emacs/21.3.50 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:Sa2X3QwXPJPud+QQGnlNkiXgJ3Y= X-Hashcash: 1:17:041109:ding@gnus.org::gllaU8BEQxQH/a0x:00000F2o X-Antivirus-Scanner: Clean mail though you should still use an Antivirus X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - washington.hostforweb.net X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - gnus.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - jpl.org X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: Precedence: bulk Original-Sender: ding-owner@lists.math.uh.edu Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:59080 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:59080 >>>>> In <87oei8kl0m.fsf@tc-1-100.kawasaki.gol.ne.jp> Miles Bader wrote: > Katsumi Yamaoka writes: >> I still think it is better to show all text by default. It >> doesn't mean abolishing emphasis but, for example: >> >> * scratch * => *scratch* > I understand what you mean. For bold, it's not so bad. But in the case > of underlining, it's _really_ ugly -- underlined+non-hidden text looks > _worse_ than simply doing no processing at all. > [BTW, if you're going to retain the emphasis characters, apply the > emphasis to them too. *foo* looks less weird than > *foo*.] I agree. I'm going to modify the default behavior of emphasis bold during this week. In addition to this, I'd like to improve the customization type for the `gnus-emphasis-alist' variable so that it may be easier to understand. Probably, to show actual regexps and `Match group' subsections will be unnecessary. >> It might look indeed ugly. However, there is likely to be this >> custom (i.e. hiding asterisks) only in Gnus and others don't >> seem to do so. > I don't think it's so important what other clients do, I think it only > matters that what Gnus does (1) `makes sense', and (2) doesn't screw up. Indeed. I only felt uneasy since I wrote buffer names in some articles recently. > In the case of _underlining_, Gnus' heuristics work very well -- there > seem to be extremely few false matches -- but for *bold*, Emacs buffer > names and common-lisp global-variables provide a source of frequent > false matches. > Since underlining+non-hidden looks _really_ bad, but bold+non-hidden is > not that horrible, I think this means that they deserve independent > defaults. I agreed with you extensively. Thank you.