GNU bug report logs - #3035
23.0.92; doc, terminology for graphics, display, terminal, etc.

Previous Next

Package: emacs;

Reported by: "Drew Adams" <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>

Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 21:40:07 UTC

Severity: minor

Done: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

Full log


Message #75 received at 3035 <at> emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
Cc: 3035 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#3035: 23.0.92;	doc, terminology for graphics, display, terminal, etc.
Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2009 23:55:04 +0300
> From: "Drew Adams" <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
> Cc: <3035 <at> emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com>
> Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2009 10:29:31 -0700
> 
> > I don't think it's a good idea to show bold in Info when it comes out
> > as slanted in print.  And making this change in the printed output as
> > well would be unwise, IMO, as this is a very old and well-known
> > convention of Texinfo.
> 
> I see. But you said the same thing about emphasis (_foo_). If both "some
> quotation" and _something emphasized_ appear as slanted text in print, then how
> does a reader distinguish these uses?

I think the reader cannot distinguish, indeed, by the typeface alone.
But @emph is really very rarely used, unlike @dfn; and then, there's
context.  So in practice the problem is not very big one, I think.  At
least I myself never had problems.




This bug report was last modified 14 years and 31 days ago.

Previous Next


GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.