Re: obscure new display features

[Miles Bader]

On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 02:59:33 +0300, Juri Linkov <address@hidden> wrote:
> I agree.  ^L fontified as a keyword looks horrible.  That's why I suggested
> to change its color to "dark red" to look more like comments.

We already had this argument.

> In other buffers I think that instead of adding escape character
> it's better to highlight NBSP in `trailing-whitespace' face because
> it serves the same purpose to turn user's attention to potentially
> dangerous whitespace characters.

The `trailing-whitespace' face is (intentionally) insane and in your
face.  The current escape sequence highlighting is fairly well-tuned
to be somewhat noticeable while not being overly annoying.  Is NBSP
something that deserves this "red alert" treatment?  I don't know.

> > I've no idea why non-breaking characters should be displayed like
> > this, but U+00AD isn't one -- it's SOFT HYPHEN.  If you're going to
> > change its display, the issue (see Unicode) is whether or not it
> > should be displayed at all -- not that I think it should be
> > invisible.
> 
> I guess it should be visible at the end of the line.

I think the same distinction used for NBSP applies:  In _editing_
contexts, it's useful to display it (1) always, (2) uniquely, and (3)
noticeably, all of which are satisfied by treating like other escape
characters.  In _display_ contexts, again similarly to NBSP, it would
make sense to display it as a normal hyphen at the end of the line and
invisible elsewhere.

-Miles
-- 
Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball.