From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/31074
Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Dan McGuirk <mcguirk@incompleteness.net>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general
Subject: Re: Improved (non-annoying) underlining
Date: 18 May 2000 19:09:17 -0700
Organization: Gnus Information Center
Sender: owner-ding@hpc.uh.edu
Message-ID: <m3d7mjuw8i.fsf@mu.incompleteness.net>
References: <vxkpuqmqjky.fsf@mesquite.charcoal.com> <ruog0rh5rqa.fsf@g.wolfram.com> <rjd7mlfkee.fsf@zuse.dina.kvl.dk> <vxkvh0ds6lu.fsf@mesquite.charcoal.com> <dpn1lp8i6v.fsf@mraz.iskon.hr> <vxkitwds596.fsf@mesquite.charcoal.com> <ylk8grv15r.fsf@windlord.stanford.edu> <vxksnvfl3k3.fsf@mesquite.charcoal.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035167525 11982 80.91.224.250 (21 Oct 2002 02:32:05 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 02:32:05 +0000 (UTC)
Return-Path: <owner-ding@hpc.uh.edu>
Original-Received: from lisa.math.uh.edu (lisa.math.uh.edu [129.7.128.49])
	by mailhost.sclp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89201D051E
	for <jason@mailhost.sclp.com>; Thu, 18 May 2000 22:08:57 -0400 (EDT)
Original-Received: from sina.hpc.uh.edu (lists@Sina.HPC.UH.EDU [129.7.3.5])
	by lisa.math.uh.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id VAB18770;
	Thu, 18 May 2000 21:08:46 -0500 (CDT)
Original-Received: by sina.hpc.uh.edu (TLB v0.09a (1.20 tibbs 1996/10/09 22:03:07)); Thu, 18 May 2000 21:08:14 -0500 (CDT)
Original-Received: from mailhost.sclp.com (postfix@sclp3.sclp.com [204.252.123.139])
	by sina.hpc.uh.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA23683
	for <ding@hpc.uh.edu>; Thu, 18 May 2000 21:08:03 -0500 (CDT)
Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org (quimby.gnus.org [193.69.4.139])
	by mailhost.sclp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70025D051E
	for <ding@gnus.org>; Thu, 18 May 2000 22:08:20 -0400 (EDT)
Original-Received: (from news@localhost)
	by quimby.gnus.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id EAA31426
	for ding@gnus.org; Fri, 19 May 2000 04:10:10 +0200 (CEST)
Original-To: ding@gnus.org
Original-Path: not-for-mail
Original-Newsgroups: gnus.ding
Original-Lines: 22
Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: adsl-63-193-245-56.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net
Original-X-Trace: quimby.gnus.org 958702209 27160 63.193.245.56 (19 May 2000 02:10:09 GMT)
Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@quimby.gnus.org
Original-NNTP-Posting-Date: 19 May 2000 02:10:09 GMT
User-Agent: Gnus/5.0807 (Gnus v5.8.7) XEmacs/21.1 (Canyonlands)
Precedence: list
X-Majordomo: 1.94.jlt7
Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:31074
X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:31074

Karl Kleinpaste <karl@charcoal.com> writes:

> The fact that people expect *this emphasis* to be semantically
> different from *this* *emphasis* is an indication that they've
> forgotten that the concept being transmitted to the reader was
> typographical variation, so the ASCII art has become an end in itself,
> because there's literally no manifestation of this supposed differing
> semantic in any venue other than text/plain emphasizers.

Well, it depends on how you're rendering the emphasis.  When you're
rendering to underlines, there is a difference between underlining an
entire phrase and underlining each word separately.  Gnus currently
displays _this underlined phrase_ the same way as _this_ _underlined_
_phrase_.  I think they should be different, because there is a
difference in meaning here.

Of course, when you're rendering to bold, there can be no visual
difference, which is fine.

-- 
Dan McGuirk    <mcguirk@incompleteness.net>
Elevator lady, elevator lady, elevator lady, lady, lady, levitate me.