Subject: Re: bug#13686: hi-yellow vs. hi-lock-1

From: Jambunathan K <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2013 01:36:50 +0530

David Koppelman <[email-masked]> writes:

>> From: Jambunathan K <kjambunathan <at> gmail.com>
>>
>> Let's focus on core, themable faces.  How many you want in what prefix
>> or file.  I propose that these faces be named opaquely as
>
>>         hi-lock-N
>>         highlight-N
>>         font-lock-user-N
>>         font-lock-highlight-N
>>         font-lock-extra-face-N
>
> I object to using cryptic names for faces. 

Ok, I withdraw hi-lock-N.  As for other faces, I believe it is Stefan's
or Emacs maintainers call.  I am moving forward, after getting a
in-principle go from Stefan.

> The user should see a recognizable color name for the default hi-lock
> faces, and should be able to pick any face he or she likes. Hi-lock
> currently does this. I know that this can be achieved using face names
> such as hi-lock-1 by extracting a color from a face definition (if
> necessary, mapping an RGB triple to a name), but this is an
> unnecessary complication. As I see it, the only things that will be
> achieved are providing for themability and abiding by a convention
> that some interpret as a separation of face attributes from face
> names.

I gave a code snippet at the end of the mail.  If you had looked at it,
you will realize that I have done nothing which changes the status quo
but I have done eveything to accommodate my requirements.  I am the
proposer, right?

Please provide specific feedback on the snippet rather than registering
a broad objection.  I have made an effort to understand the
"I-want-color" camp and I have also openly acknowledged that the
"I-want-color" camp have valid and sensible arguments.

Jambunathan K.