GNU bug report logs - #40951
Weird highlighting

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Kévin Le Gouguec <kevin.legouguec <at> gmail.com>
To: 積丹尼 Dan Jacobson <jidanni <at> jidanni.org>
Cc: 40951 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#40951: Weird highlighting
Date: Fri, 01 May 2020 20:44:13 +0200

積丹尼 Dan Jacobson <jidanni <at> jidanni.org> writes:

>>>>>> "KLG" == Kévin Le Gouguec <kevin.legouguec <at> gmail.com> writes:
> KLG> 積丹尼 Dan Jacobson <jidanni <at> jidanni.org> writes:
>
> KLG> on the other hand I don't see how Gnus could distinguish between a
> KLG> verb added deliberately by the article author, and the same verb
> KLG> added automatically as part of the mail client's citation
> KLG> boilerplate.
>
> Hmmm, well don't boilerplates have some @ and/or < and > etc. in them?

If we focus solely on Gnus's message.el, message-insert-citation-line
can be relied on to use whatever was in the "From" header.  From what I
gather from RFC 5322, that should at least include an "@" sign.

That only covers Gnus's "writes:" though.  Spelunking in lisp/gnus for
other verbs featured in gnus-cite-attribution-suffix, I get the
impression that other MUAs tend to follow suit, but that might be
wishful thinking.

Assuming false negatives (failing to highlight) on articles from
"non-conforming" MUAs are less annoying than false positives
(highlighting part of a line that's not introducing a citation) on
"conforming" ones, I'm still not sure where the right "fix" would
belong.

gnus-cite-attribution-suffix's job is to match just the final verb
before the citation, so I think it's fine the way it is.  There's
probably a way to teach gnus-article-highlight-citation that it
shouldn't apply gnus-cite-attribution-face to the whole line, but I'm
not familiar enough with the code to see how to go about it.

Previous Next

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