[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: assuming light or dark background
From: |
Dave Love |
Subject: |
Re: assuming light or dark background |
Date: |
Fri, 22 Feb 2008 17:19:34 +0000 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.110007 (No Gnus v0.7) |
Jason Rumney <jasonr@gnu.org> writes:
> jidanni@jidanni.org wrote:
>> RFCs are unreadable now for me. Must be due to
>>
>> (defface rfcview-headlink-face
>> '((t (:foreground "blue"))
>> (t (:bold t)))
>> "Face used for hyperlinks to headings."
>> :group 'rfcview)
>>
>
> This doesn't appear to be part of Emacs.
Indeed. It isn't part of
<URL:http://www.loveshack.ukfsn.org/emacs/rfcview.el> either.
> Probably a better way of
> defining that face is
>
> (defface rfcview-headlink-face
> '((t (:inherit 'link)))
> "Face used for hyperlinks to headngs."
> :group 'rfcview)
(facep 'link)
=> nil
> That way it will take advantage of any variations that already exist
> for the built-in link face, such as light, dark, grayscale, or user
> customizations.
If there was a face defined for hyperlinks in the relevant versions of
Emacs, it would be appropriate just to use it (with the `face' custom
type), not define more vanity faces. That was what we intended for
Emacs 21 as far as I remember, even if it didn't get done well. I
shouldn't have 281 separately-defined faces in my current session --
Gnus being the biggest culprit.