Ihor Radchenko wrote:
If we deal with variable pitch fonts, the bullet itself may have funny
width. Using fixed pitch won't help then. Of course, we can also add
faces for bullets, but that feels like a non-ideal solution of the
problem.
The core idea is to assign a face to any syntax used to indicate outline
structure. Mixed pitches is one use case, and it works well; I've been
testing this for about six months. But independently of this, I think
being able to identify structural markers and distinguish them from text
content is generally useful.
I am not sure about leading spaces.
You may need different things depending what kind of element the leading
spaces apply to. That might be non-trivial.
This was my initial reaction too. But what purpose could leading spaces
have other than to convey structure? If these are given a face named
'org-structural-space' or something similar that has no properties by
default, I think this is just giving a name to the user's intent.
Perhaps source blocks should be exempted. But even in this case,
indentation is intentional structural space so such a label wouldn't be
semantically incorrect...
I'd appreciate thoughts on this. I haven't come up with an example where
this might cause unintended behavior, and I haven't seen any in several
months of usage. What might I be overlooking?
For headline indicators, if you think that `org-level-color-stars-only'
is not enough, we may add more options. Maybe replace
`org-level-color-stars-only' with a pair of faces.
For headlines, `org-level-color-stars-only' is close, and could be
modified to apply multiple faces as you mentioned. This could
alternately be left as is, and an additional keyword could be applied.
Either would do.
Plain list indicators might be ok.
These are pretty straightforward and the keywords don't overlap with
anything else.
