From xemacs-m  Mon Jan 13 17:01:43 1997
Received: from steadfast.teradyne.com (steadfast.teradyne.com [131.101.1.200])
          by xemacs.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) with ESMTP
	  id RAA08000 for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Mon, 13 Jan 1997 17:01:42 -0600 (CST)
Received: from kiki.icd.teradyne.com (kiki.icd.teradyne.com [131.101.1.30]) by steadfast.teradyne.com (8.7.1/8.7.1) with ESMTP id SAA29668 for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Mon, 13 Jan 1997 18:04:41 -0500 (EST)
Received: from spacely.icd.teradyne.com (spacely.icd.teradyne.com [131.101.10.9]) by kiki.icd.teradyne.com (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id RAA08420 for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Mon, 13 Jan 1997 17:59:05 -0500 (EST)
Received: from spacely by spacely.icd.teradyne.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
	id SAA15397; Mon, 13 Jan 1997 18:01:21 -0500
Message-Id: <199701132301.SAA15397@spacely.icd.teradyne.com>
X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0beta (patched 1/7/97)
To: xemacs-beta@xemacs.org
reply-to: acs@acm.org
Subject: mode-motion+
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 18:01:21 -0500
From: Vinnie Shelton  <shelton@icd.teradyne.com>

Is anyone using mode-motion+?  I just tried using it with 20b90 and I got a 
whole bunch of:

Symbol's function definition is void: window-edges

Ignoring the annoying beeps, "inverted" highlighting seemed an awful lot 
like "bold" to me.  Do we want to support this, or should we remove it?

--vin

