Re: color bug report, pgnus 0.84

Re: color bug report, pgnus 0.84

[Kai.Grossjohann]

lconrad@world.std.com writes:

  > The attached message appears on my screen (in xemacs 20.4) with the
  > first line (Steve Allen wrote) in red, the quote from Steve Allen in
  > red, and the quoted section beginning "I agree" in blue.  I would have 
  > expected the "Steve Allen wrote" line to be blue, like the "I agree"
  > section which is at the same indentation level.

The lines might be on the same indentation level, but they don't
belong together.  Take this message as an example.  Clearly,
"lconrad@world.std.com writes:" and the text preceded by ">" that
follows it belong together, so they should be in the same color.

The previous paragraph, however, does not belong to the previously
mentioned text and thus should be in a different color, the same one
as this paragraph and the following text.

kai
-- 
Life is hard and then you die.

color bug report, pgnus 0.84

[lconrad]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 327 bytes --]

The attached message appears on my screen (in xemacs 20.4) with the
first line (Steve Allen wrote) in red, the quote from Steve Allen in
red, and the quoted section beginning "I agree" in blue.  I would have 
expected the "Steve Allen wrote" line to be blue, like the "I agree"
section which is at the same indentation level.


[-- Attachment #2: Type: message/rfc822, Size: 2712 bytes --]

From: C.Walshaw@greenwich.ac.uk
To: abcusers@argyll.wisemagic.com
Cc: C.Walshaw@greenwich.ac.uk ()
Subject: Re: [abcusers] Re: Dynamics
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1999 10:28:05 +0100 (BST)
Message-ID: <4375.199906170928@sark.gre.ac.uk>

> Steve Allen wrote:
> 
> >Keep it simple.
> >Don't let dynamics befuddle the consensus on the rest.
> >
> >We're not ready for a final, fully general dynamic notation -- there's
> >lots of experimentation left to do
> 
> I agree. Discussion of dynamics is important, and we should keep it up, as
> long as we don't let it interfere with developing a consensus on
> rationalizing and standardizing things which are currently being done. We
> should be able to get a pretty clear abc 2.0 now, without deciding on a
> fully elaborated dynamics.
> 

Definitely. I would like people who use such things (and personally I don't,
so I feel even less able to define the syntax) to experiment with !ppp!,
!crescendo(!, etc. After that we can think about short cuts,
e.g. !<(! for !crescendo(! and using a separate field.

	Regards,

	Chris Walshaw
	C.Walshaw@gre.ac.uk



[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 131 bytes --]


-- 
Laura (mailto:lconrad@world.std.com , http://www.world.std.com/~lconrad/ )
(617) 661-8097	 
233 Broadway, Cambridge, MA 02139