Re: Overbearing undownloaded face

[David Abrahams <dave@boost-consulting.com>]

Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> writes:

> David Abrahams <dave@boost-consulting.com> writes:
>
>> Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> writes:
>>
>>> David Abrahams <dave@boost-consulting.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> I sent a message asking for opinions about this a few months ago, but
>>>>> now that I try to find my message, I note that it contained a screen
>>>>> shot so it was probably rejected due to size.  So:  Opinions?
>>>>
>>>> I'm likin' it, though I don't exactly understand what the effect was.
>>>
>>> For me, it makes unread (and ticked, and ...) articles black instead
>>> of a green-blue-ish (undownloadable mark) color which looks almost
>>> identical to the green-blue-ish color which is used for read messages.
>>
>> That's what it does for me, too.  What I meant was I'm not sure what
>> it's doing *technically*.  If moving those Sexprs down makes them
>> ineffectual, can't they be eliminated?
>
> Ah.  But it still has priority over the read mark.  So if you have a
> read, undownloaded, article it will be marked with the undownloaded
> face instead of the read face.  However, if the article is unread (or
> ticked, or ...), you will see the unread (or tick, or ...) face,
> instead of the undownloaded face.
>
> Wasn't undownloaded articles marked with a @ or % mark or something
> before?  Do people care about the downloadedness of articles?  I
> don't.

I care a little.  I sometimes go away from my network connection and
want to take a record of some conversations with me.


-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com