On Fri, 01 Dec 2000  14:59:07 +0900, Conrad Schneiker wrote:
> Dave Thomas writes:
>  
[snip]
>  Which brings up the question of why does the Ruby FAQ give a link to one 
> Vim syntax file, while Vim5.7 ships with a different syntax file? (I 
> suspect the answer is because Vim5.7 is fairly recent, and Vim5.6 didn't 
> have a Ruby syntax file.)

Yes, the FAQ should be updated. Mirko Nasato and I--unknowingly of
each other--developed vim syntax files in the vim-5.6 timeframe. I
found out when I contacted Bram Molenaar to get it into the
distribution. Mirko's version is more complete, so that should become
the standard.

(How do I _remove_ it from the RAA?)

> Which brings up the question of how the Emacs syntax highlighting scheme 
> differs from the 2 Vim schemes. Is there any chance of a common 
> consolidated scheme? As color slowly becomes ever more seemingly 
> semi-omni-present in documentation, it might be nice to have a single 
> common scheme of code coloring for editing and documentation. 

Having a common default would be nice. If we come up with a proposal,
I guess Mirko will be glad to cooperate.

> Finally, out of curiosity, do most people that use syntax highlighting 
> also normally use dark text on a light background, or light text on a dark 
> background?

dark on light normally, though I have a one-click-away,
all-night-hacking-soothe-my-sore-eyes low-light-conditions
light-on-dark scheme...  ;)

	Michel