On Tue, 3 Feb 2015, Alex Efros wrote:
On Mon, Feb 02, 2015 at 04:08:08PM +0100, Dag Wieers wrote:
When I started my AsciiDoc vim syntax file it did a few things that were not
in the one that shipped with AsciiDoc. Like using old for actual *bold*
etc... Different colors for document title and other titles.
If you talking about visual representation by using real bold/italic fonts
instead of just changing colors for same font - all this is can and should
be configured in different place.
Vim syntax file's work is only detect different syntax elements, to let
you customize their look and feel yourself. It actually does set some
defaults for this, but this is just to make it looks better out-of-box.
To do this it's better to define your own color scheme, just to avoid
adding a lot of highlighting commands into ~/.vimrc and make it easier to
switch color scheme if needed. So, add into ~/.vimrc just one line:
colorscheme dag
In my opinion, the default asciidoc vim file must provide the best user
experience as possible, this means showing bold as bold, italic as italic,
and providing useful colors to other constructs. Mapping them to existing
programming-alike styles (which are rather limited) makes absolutely no
sense IMNSHO.
However if your view is the consensus then I don't mind maintaining my own.
PS Colorscheme's look useful, but my syntax-file predates one shipping
with upstream vim.
--
Dag
