From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Mike Kupfer Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#22043: 25.0.50; search-forward and char folding Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2015 12:31:43 -0800 Message-ID: <10400.1448915503@allegro.localdomain> References: <15605.1448748702@allegro.localdomain> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1448915600 1836 80.91.229.3 (30 Nov 2015 20:33:20 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2015 20:33:20 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 22043@debbugs.gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Nov 30 21:33:09 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1a3V8H-0002Rl-66 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 30 Nov 2015 21:33:09 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:43233 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a3V8G-0001cr-Hn for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 30 Nov 2015 15:33:08 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:55013) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a3V8D-0001cb-FG for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 30 Nov 2015 15:33:06 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a3V8A-00027d-90 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 30 Nov 2015 15:33:05 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:43591) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a3V8A-00027Z-62 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 30 Nov 2015 15:33:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1a3V89-0004G4-Sz for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 30 Nov 2015 15:33:01 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Mike Kupfer Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2015 20:33:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 22043 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 22043-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B22043.144891553116284 (code B ref 22043); Mon, 30 Nov 2015 20:33:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 22043) by debbugs.gnu.org; 30 Nov 2015 20:32:11 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33299 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1a3V7K-0004Ea-TY for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 30 Nov 2015 15:32:11 -0500 Original-Received: from shell1.rawbw.com ([198.144.192.42]:46586) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1a3V6x-0004Dp-IK for 22043@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 30 Nov 2015 15:32:06 -0500 Original-Received: from allegro.localdomain (m208-249.dsl.rawbw.com [198.144.208.249]) by shell1.rawbw.com (8.15.1/8.15.1) with ESMTP id tAUKVhWl067483; Mon, 30 Nov 2015 12:31:44 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from m.kupfer@acm.org) X-Authentication-Warning: shell1.rawbw.com: Host m208-249.dsl.rawbw.com [198.144.208.249] claimed to be allegro.localdomain In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 30 Nov 2015 19:32:36 +0200." <83egf7mlzf.fsf@gnu.org> X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+mdk01; nmh 1.6; GNU Emacs 24.5.2 Content-ID: <10399.1448915503.1@allegro.localdomain> X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 208.118.235.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:109475 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii wrote: > Anyway, if I return to the original issue, the section with the > offending "Search commands in Emacs by default perform character > folding" sentence has its main focus on explaining what is character > folding and how to enable/disable it; it does not focus on the > specific commands. Well, the explanation of what character folding is actually happens in the previous paragraph. The one that starts with "Search commands in Emacs by default perform character folding" is just about enabling or disabling character folding. I agree with your point about flow and not distracting the reader by throwing multiple issues together. And I think that for most users, information about enabling/disabling char folding is more important than knowing which functions do folding, so I think that paragraph should (as it does) come next after the description of what char folding is. > This is standard practice in user-level documentation, when > describing complex issues: you first provide an overview that might > not be 100% accurate, but should give the reader a clear and simple > enough idea of the subject, leaving the more accurate details for > later in-depth coverage. Yes, but when I'm reading documentation, if I see what looks like a definite statement and then I find something else that appears to contradict the first statement, my first reaction is to start doubting the documentation as a whole. The way I usually handle this when I'm writing is to insert a "weasel word". What do you think about changing the first phrase to Search commands in Emacs generally perform character folding by default (or maybe "commonly" instead of "generally"). As a reader, this tells me that there are exceptions but I shouldn't worry about them at this point in the text. As an alternative: sometimes in documentation I'll see a definite statement, followed later by an explicit acknowledgement that the statement was a simplification. I'd be okay with that approach, too. As a reader, it tells me that the first statement was deliberately chosen, not an oversight. regards, mike