[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: (type graphic)
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
Re: (type graphic) |
Date: |
Wed, 25 Oct 2000 22:11:54 +0200 |
> From: Jason Rumney <address@hidden>
> Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 19:55:10 +0100
>
> To clarify for Eli, the face definitions that Miles is talking about
> are those which take on a raised button appearance. I think that this
> is only available on graphic displays, as it involves drawing shaded
> lines around text, so a `(type graphic)' seems appropriate to me.
You are right, and I should read the code before commenting on it ;-)
Sorry about the noise.
- Re: (type graphic), (continued)
- Re: (type graphic), Gerd Moellmann, 2000/10/26
- Re: (type graphic), Andrew Innes, 2000/10/26
- Re: (type graphic), Eli Zaretskii, 2000/10/26
- Re: (type graphic), Jason Rumney, 2000/10/26
- Re: (type graphic), Eli Zaretskii, 2000/10/26
- Re: (type graphic), Jason Rumney, 2000/10/26
Re: (type graphic), Jason Rumney, 2000/10/25
- Re: (type graphic),
Eli Zaretskii <=
- Re: (type graphic), Eli Zaretskii, 2000/10/27
- Re: (type graphic), Miles Bader, 2000/10/29
- Re: (type graphic), Miles Bader, 2000/10/29
- Re: (type graphic), Eli Zaretskii, 2000/10/30
- Re: (type graphic), Eli Zaretskii, 2000/10/30
- Re: (type graphic), Miles Bader, 2000/10/30
- Re: (type graphic), Eli Zaretskii, 2000/10/30